WhatFinger

Burns Chronicles No 37 -- When that government, established to serve the people, determines to serve itself, it has failed its purpose

Intent v. Effect


There has been no substantial interview regarding the deliberations that resulted in 12 Not Guilty Verdicts, and One Verdict where the jury could not get consensus. However, we do have a bit of information that is probably the most critical single piece with regard to understanding just what happened that led to those verdicts. Juror #4, the juror that brought Judge Brown the indication of bias by Juror #11, has stated that the government failed to show that the occupiers had the intention to impede the government employees. That the failure of the employees to report to the Refuge may have been an effect of the occupation. Since the Jury Instructions required the government to prove "intent", the jury had to find them Not Guilty, at least with regard to Counts One and Two. In a written statement, Juror #4 said, "All 12 agreed that impeding existed, even if as an effect of the occupation.'' The difference between "effect" and "intent", then, becomes the foundation for this article.
Read Full Article...

Welcome to CFP’s Comment Section!

The Comment section of online publications is the new front in the ongoing Cancel Culture Battle.

Big Tech and Big Media are gunning for the Conservative Voice—through their Comment Sections.

Canada Free Press wishes to stay in the fight, and we want our fans, followers, commenters there with us.

We ask only that commenters keep it civil, keep it clean.

Thank You for your patience and for staying aboard the CFP ‘Mother Ship’.

READ OUR Commenting Policy


CFP Comments

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Comments


Support Canada Free Press

Donate


Recommended by Canada Free Press


Subscribe

Sponsored