Marcella Brooks Talk

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:03:48 GMT  <== Politics ==> 

CuriousEvidence.com at Google Video - a June 2000 talk by the foreman of the jury that acquitted Whitey Harrell for not filing an income tax form. Neither the prosecution nor the judge would even tell them the number of the law requiring Mr. Whitey to file.

And the conclusion is... No law? Not guilty.

Add comment Edit post Add post

Comments (4):

Focus-Grouping

Submitted by Billy Beck on Tue, 10 Apr 2007 19:37:54 GMT

I have a question:

What moral leg are these people going to have to stand on if the state just writes a law authorizing income taxes in exactly the way that they're begging for it?

Don'tcha get it? They're just acting like a focus-group in a market survey. The only remarkable thing about it is that -- so far -- the collectivists haven't answered them directly on-point with legislation.

Edit comment

no law - not guilty - from the juror

Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 01 May 2007 03:12:48 GMT

Sir, I don't think you get it. This was not a moral decision. It was based purely on the lack of the state to show evidence beyond reasonable doubt. I think you would want similar treatment.

Marcy Brooks

Edit comment

I'd want similar, and more

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Tue, 01 May 2007 13:37:19 GMT

I would certainly want similar treatment. No law, no possibility of a guilty verdict. And I salute you, Ms. Brooks, for having the temerity to stand up to the judge in that way.

But I would want more that that. No Constitutional authority for the law should also mean no possibility of a guilty verdict. As should the law's violation of an obvious human right. No matter how many people voted for it.

That means that no law forbidding buying, owning, or carrying a personal defense weapon would ever result in a guilty verdict. No law stealing money by calling it a "tax" would ever result in a guilty verdict. No law forbidding the ingestion of any substance by an adult would ever result in jail time. No law requiring any kind of license or registration for anything could ever be prosecuted. And nothing consenting adults do in the privacy of their own property would ever be cause for an arrest.

Edit comment

no law - not guilty - from the juror

Submitted by Marcy Brooks on Fri, 23 Nov 2007 01:41:48 GMT

I am absolutely amazed by the continued interest in this video. I thought I'd open a forum for any questions, comments for those who have viewed it here on Bill's site.

And thank you again Bill, for investing in truth and freedom.

Marcy Brooks

Edit comment