Tag Archive: Contempt of court

Reblogged from : Blavatar Bullets First



As anyone who has ever seen a TV court drama knows, contempt of court is a charge that a judge can levy if he feels that he, or the court has been disrespected.


It can be leveled against a person who is legitimately being disrespectful/disruptive or it simply can be used by a judge to punish someone he doesn’t like or whose tone annoys him.


  1. Direct contempt is that which occurs in the presence of the presiding judge (in facie curiae) and may be dealt with summarily: the judge notifies the offending party that he or she has acted in a manner which disrupts the tribunal and prejudices the administration of justice. After giving the person the opportunity to respond, the judge may impose the sanction immediately.


Now, I have seen first hand a judge with a quick trigger finger on this for a person in the back of the courtroom who did not remove his hat quick enough.  Not to say that abuse of the Contempt ruling is running rampant, but the opportunity for it do do so is there.


Now, New York State…it all its “wisdom” has decided to extend this arbitrary and subjective notion to the Police Officers of the State.


By doing this, the simple act of a person exercising their constitutional rights now runs the risk of being charged with a felony.


The politicians in Albany want to pull the wool over the public’s eye by stating that this bill S.2402 would make it a felony to physically attack a police officer while he is on duty.  The politicians are hoping that we will apathetically swallow that BS and not ask any questions.


The first question being: Isn’t it ALL READY a felony to physically assault a police officer?  The answer is obviously yes.


So what does S2402 actually say?  For that, one must actually READ the bill, and since we all know politicians don’t have time to do such tedious things like read the bills they are voting on, I went ahead and read it.


Read More  Here

Activist Post

Army Vietnam Veteran, peaceful freedom activist, and local small businessman, Mark Schimdter, has been jailed for 145 days by Judge Belvin Perry. Schmidter’s sentence began Thursday after he was found guilty for distributing jury nullification info outside of Perry’s self-imposed “free speech zone.” during the Casey Anthony trial.

Facebook Page

Mark E. Schmidter is an activist for jury rights whose story we covered one year ago. He was originally facing a year in jail after being found guilty of two felonies: External Criminal Contempt of Court, and jury tampering, for distributing information outside the Orange County Courthouse in Florida.

We noted that Schmidter was not guilty of any actual law, but rather rules written by the acting judge. These rules that Schmidter is in violation of are for demonstrating outside of a “free speech zone” determined by Judge Perry. Schmidter, who was first arrested in June 2011, has maintained his innocence and that the judge’s orders he violated were a direct violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution.

Furthermore, the very rule he was found to be in violation of has been overturned.

Judge Belvin Perry issued Administrative Order # 2011 03 which states that if anyone hands out information, talks or hold a sign outside the courthouse, they would be held in contempt of court and jury tampering.
Administrative Order #2011 07 states that anything that has to do with “Free Speech” may only be done in the free speech zones which are two 10’x30’ remote areas nearly a football field away from the courthouse doors. It is the same rule that was used to jail another jury nullification activist, Julian Heicklen.

Here is Schmidter being interviewed before his court appearance in June, 2011:


Read Full Article and  Watch Video Here