Court Sets Ominous Precedent: Informing Jurors of Their Rights Is Now ILLEGAL

By Justin Gardner

Big Rapids, MI — As constitutional rights are steadily eroded in the U.S. through the burgeoning police/surveillance state, one case in Michigan provides an example of just how dire the situation has gotten. Keith Woods, a resident of Mecosta County, was charged and recently convicted for the “crime” of standing on a public sidewalk and handing out fliers about juror rights.

Woods was exercising his First Amendment rights and raising awareness about something the courts deliberately fail to tell jurors when beginning a trial – jury nullification, or the right to vote one’s conscience. For this, Woods – a father of eight and former pastor – was charged with jury tampering, after an initial felony charge of obstructing justice was dropped following public outcry.

Even with the reduced charge, the case has very troubling implications for free speech rights. The county prosecutor, seemingly furious that a citizen would dare inform the public on jury nullification, said Woods’ pamphlet “is designed to benefit a criminal defendant.”

The prosecutor then seemed to contradict himself in a statement, saying, “Once again the pamphlet by itself, fine, people have views on what the law should be, that’s fine. It’s the manner by which this pamphlet was handed out.”

Woods, who testified in his own defense, stated under oath that he did not ask anyone walking into the courthouse if they were a juror, remained on the public sidewalk and never blocked any area. He decided to hand out the pamphlets at a Nov. 24, 2015 trial of an Amish man accused of draining a wetland on his property in violation of Dept. of Environment Quality rules.

Woods’ pamphlet did not contain anything specific to the case or any Michigan court, according to defense attorney David Kallman. But this innocuous behavior, which should be viewed as a public service, drew the attention of a judge who became “very concerned” when he saw the pamphlets being carried by some of the jury pool.

I thought this was going to trash my jury trial, basically,” testified Judge [Peter] Jaklevic. “It just didn’t sound right.

Jacklevic ended up sending that jury pool home on Nov. 24, 2015 when Yoder took a plea.

Jaklevic continued to testify that he stepped into the hallway with Mecosta County Prosecutor Brian Thiede when Det. Erlandson and a deputy brought Wood into the courthouse that day. Mecosta County Deputy Jeff Roberts testified he “asked Wood to come inside because the Judge wanted to talk with him,” then threatened to call a city cop if Wood did not come inside.

Wood testified Judge Jaklevic never spoke to him that day, or him any questions, before ordering his arrest. He tells FOX 17 he had concerns his case was tried in Mecosta County where all of this happened, involving several court officials including the judge.”

To recap, this judge said “it just didn’t sound right” that people were carrying informational pamphlets on their rights as jurors, and he possibly lied on the stand to justify the fact that he had Woods arrested for doing nothing wrong. What’s more, Woods was brought to trial in the same court where all of this transpired, where county officials had literally teamed up to violate his rights in the first place.

“So our taxpayer dollars are paying their salary, and they were the actors in this case to arrest me, to imprison me, and all that,” said Woods. “I did have a very great concern that they were the ones trying the case, because they work together day in and day out.”

Defense attorney Kallman notes that during Woods’ trial, they were prohibited from arguing several points to the jury.

Family Survival System – Free Book (Ad)

“And of course, the First Amendment issues are critical: that we believe our client had the absolute First Amendment right to hand out these brochures right here on this sidewalk,” said Kallman. “That’s part of the problem of where we feel we were handcuffed quite a bit.”

When asked how he felt about his First Amendment rights, Woods replied,

Oh, I don’t feel like I have them.

We had briefs about the First Amendment, free speech. It was very clear today, I know the jury doesn’t hear that, but it was very clear that the government did not meet their burden to restrict my free speech on that public sidewalk that day. It was very clear.

Justin Gardner is a peaceful free-thinker with a background in the biological sciences. He is interested in bringing rationality back into the national discourse, and independent journalism as a challenge to the status quo. This article first appeared here at The Free Thought Project.

Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

41 Comments on "Court Sets Ominous Precedent: Informing Jurors of Their Rights Is Now ILLEGAL"

  1. This needs to be appealed and fast. How can they not allow info about jury nullification at the trial? BS BS BS
    Get a new venue.

  2. It is important to understand that the Jury is a tool of the people, not the judicial branch. It is under no branch. This is a usurpation, and it is not lawful on the part of courts.

    James Madison, father of the US Constitution: “In suits at common law, between man and man, the trial by jury, as one of the best securities to the rights of the people, ought to remain inviolate”, describing describe that right “as essential to secure the liberty of the people as any one of the pre-existent rights of nature.”

    The Constitution provides five separate tribunals with veto power
    — Representatives,
    — Senate,
    — Executive,
    — Judges, and
    — Jury; Where each enactment of law must pass before it gains the authority to punish those who choose to violate it. The jury serve as one of the tests each law must pass before it assumes enough popular authority to be enforced.

    “It is important to know that at the time of the American revolution, the jury was considered the judge of both law and fact by everyone. That today’s civil forfeiture of private property being done by law enforcement every where was already found to be a crime against the American people on the part of those who serve within our governments. In that case involving the civil forfeiture of private property by the state of Georgia, first Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay, Georgia vs. Brailsford, instructed jurors that the jury has “a right … to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy.” This was done so that the people serving understood that they decide the rightness of a law or action being committed by those who serve within our government at all levels. Yet, once again theft from the people by those that serve within our governments,
    particularly those working within “law enforcement” which should actually and rightfully be called color of law enforcement.”

    Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 1979: “The founders of our nation considered the right of trial by jury in civil cases an important bulwark against tyranny and corruption, a ‘safeguard too precious to be left to the whim of the sovereign.'”

    The founders had much to say about Juries also.

    Richard Henry Lee, First Senate: “Trial by jury in civil causes,… trial by jury in criminal causes, and the benefits of the writ of habeas corpus… all stand on the same footing; they are the common rights of Americans.”

    Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Paine: “I consider [trial by jury] as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man,
    by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.”

    Thomas Jefferson to Alexander Donald: “By a declaration of rights I mean one which shall stipulate freedom of religion, freedom of the press, trial by juries in all cases…”

    Alexander Hamilton: “The civil jury is a valuable safeguard to liberty.”

    James Madison: “In suits at common law, trial by jury in civil cases is as essential to secure the liberty of the people as any one of the pre-existent rights of nature.”

    John Adams, first proponent of the Declaration of Independence and Second President, 1771 2 Life and Works of John Adams 253-255 (C.F. Adams ed. 1856): “It is not only [the juror’s] right, but his duty…. to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience even though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.”

    John Jay, first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, charging the jury in Georgia v. Brailsford, 3 Dallas 1, 4, (U.S. 1794).: “You [the jurors] have, nevertheless, a right to take upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy.”

    Alexander Hamilton, first Secretary of the Treasury, People v. Croswell, 3 Johns Cas. 361, 362 (1804) as reprinted in Sparf and Hansen v. United States, 167 U.S. at 146-148, dissenting opinion, (1895).: “That
    in criminal cases, the law and fact being always blended, the jury, for reasons of a political and peculiar nature, for the security of life and liberty, is entrusted with the power of deciding both law and fact.”

  3. Tyrants all !!! Tar and feather them immediately !!!

  4. Hello people of Michigan. You must do something to address these blatant violations of our rights. Get organized. Get involved. If you think, “oh, it does not affect me “, well someday it will because we fail to be involved to stop those who want to enslave us. The judge is one who is part of a system to deny US citizens their rights and he should be removed and jailed for is action.

  5. Reconstitute The United States of America (the country) and apply the “original” 13th amendment (Titles and Nobility Act (amendment)). All “BAR” attorneys cease to be citizens and unable to hold office of any sort (judges to).

  6. This is wrong on so many levels…. Contemplating everything that is going on in our country today, if….IF….a Civil War were to break out, for which cause would it be? There are so many bad things happening to WE THE PEOPLE, it’s very difiicult to pick a Cause and rally against it… There are so many Causes to choose from and they all need attention… it’s a crazy time to be an American.

    • I’m pretty sure the cause is going to be the revocation of the 2nd Amendment. Once the PTB get the balz to take that step, it’s going to be on like Donkey Kong. But, you’re absolutely right that after the dust settles…if we win…there’s going to be tons of stuff to set right again. The list seems endless.

    • paula boyer | June 4, 2017 at 2:20 pm | Reply

      Boy oh boy, Randall, You got that one right…….

  7. Garry Compton | June 4, 2017 at 3:37 am | Reply

    How much is it going to take – concerning your loss of rights – in order for Americans to get thru their heads that the NWO – has taken over the American Court systems ?

  8. This is the reason that I would NEVER live in Michigan. This state is probably the worst in the country for violating the rights of it’s citizens. Stay out of Michigan!

  9. Zaphod Braden | June 4, 2017 at 7:22 am | Reply

    Since “Ignorance of the LAW is no excuse” and JURY NULLIFICATION is LAW …… then EVERY jury MUST be informed of “Jury nullification” as part of the Judge’s Instructions to the Jury. If the Jury is NOT informed of Jury Nullification then any decision they reach IS NULL & VOID.

    • Been a long time since I looked into Jury Nullification but if I remember correctly, it is not a law in and of itself but is the potential consequence of two other laws. 1. Juries can not be punished for a wrong decision (no matter the evidence) and 2. A not guilty defendant can not be tried again for the same crime. Because it is not a law you may be vulnerable to perjury due to the questions asked of potential jurors, “do you have any beliefs that might prevent you from making a decision based strictly on the law”? To say no and carry out nullification makes you a liar (sin) a perjurer (criminally liable). short and concise.

    • made a post and went immediately to Disqus profile and it was there flagged as pending (by activist post?). censorship by other means.

  10. This is how its done folks. Bit by bit our power has been co-opted. And might I add now so blazenly I am shocked someone hasn’t just lost it and exacted retribution. Imprisonment for speaking truth to power is a catalyst of revolution. The PTB can’t have that.

    • I was sickened to read Trump’s Tweet stating that the “judges need to give us back our rights”…as if they had the power to take them in the first place! It shows a total ignorance of our Founding and a profound misunderstanding of WHERE our Rights originate (from Almighty God, not judges!).

      People keep telling me how Trump is better than Hillary, but given repeated statements on his part like this…I can’t see how. I wouldn’t give a wooden nickel for either of them. God’s Judgment on America proceeds unabated.

      • The Leftists are already unhinged about Trump and you want him to enact Jeffersonian Law????
        It’s Fine with me, but YOU had better be Pre-pared to Water Mr. Jefferson’s Tree Too!
        Posting on the internet is a far cry from Restoring a long lost Republic.

      • jizzmo onyabhuti | June 4, 2017 at 3:24 pm | Reply

        How true. This, even our Constitutional for of government, is God’s Judgement against us since the time of Saul. He told us this would happen, and it has. Will we learn our lesson this time?

      • I responded to this post yesterday and it was being moderated, but now it is totally gone ! This is the third time Activist Post has deleted my comments, AND I even sent them some money ! I am leaving this website even though I like its content. I suppose they will delete this one too, all without giving a reason for not posting it. Goodbye.

        • It may not be the AP deleting. When I use certain public connections the site is so wiggy I can’t read an article before it freezes up my computer. Often I can not open the site at all or I can but see no comments at all or I can but can’t reply or comment.

          • chiripero | June 5, 2017 at 9:13 am |

            Thanks G’ma G. I seem to be commenting on other sites just fine, it is just this one that deletes me. I just unsubscribed, so I won’t be coming back unless they give me a good explanation. I thought maybe it was because I included a link to another website, but there are links in comments here, so that must not be why AC deleted my comments here.

        • I have also had a few disapear.

          • chiripero | June 6, 2017 at 6:34 pm |

            Keith: There is my comment that disappeared ! You up-voted it, and I thank you. Maybe Activist Post felt sorry for me and posted it. Do you see anything in there that would give them a reason to delete it ?

          • nothing that should have a problem at all. sorry for the late response, having some computer problems myself. thanks for your post keith

    • longhorndude | June 8, 2017 at 7:36 pm | Reply


  11. emmanuelozon | June 4, 2017 at 7:50 am | Reply

    Should this guy appeal this decision, he will undoubtedly prevail. Let’s wait for the whole process to finish before we start wailing about losing even more rights.

    • That’s the attitude that got us into this mess in the first place…and it’s more than a little sad that you still don’t realize this fact.

  12. This same atrocity plays out every day, all across the fruited plains, in every county courthouse in America. The fish stinks from the head down. The Constitution is dead…murdered by the police, judges and lawyers for the purpose of self enrichment.


  14. thecraziesarerunningtheasylum | June 4, 2017 at 8:48 am | Reply

    Not only did he NOT tamper with the jury he was doing the job of the judge, my sn says it all….

  15. Honkythecracker | June 4, 2017 at 9:52 am | Reply

    What ya gonna do about it? …. nothin…..except cry… enjoy this police state cause it’s only going to get worse … that’s why I laugh when bad things happen to them people

  16. Doran Zeigler | June 4, 2017 at 10:36 am | Reply

    The “justice” system, or lack of it, is a closed system. The American Bar Association is a private organization that certifies lawyers, but does not license them and is the organization that has written the standards and requirements for all attorneys. What most people do not know is that lawyers are NOT LICENSED, Only state, and federal governments can issue licenses. You need a license to drive, get married, hunt, etc., but you do not need a license to practice law or medicine. All that is needed is certification.

    If lawyer is disbarred, it is not the government that does it, it is the local bar associations. The ABA is also the entity that has gotten 48 states to pass laws against unauthorized practice of law (UPA). The constitution and many supreme court decisions have upheld the right of a litigant to choose their own counsel. This can be a bar certified lawyer or it can be your uncle Joe who owns a fruit stand.

    Most of these state laws are in direct violation of the constitution, but try to argue this case in a local court where the judge is a product of the ABA, and any DA who argues against it is also an ABA product. Constitutional law means nothing in local courts.

    The deck is stacked against the common man. If you can’t afford a lawyer, which is the case for most people, you must then represent yourself, pro se. If you have a friend who is more knowledgeable than you on the laws, you cannot have that person speak for you. This was one of the most important freedoms to be taken away from the people. the right to choose counsel. This is a tradition that was codified in old English law and further written into our constitution. Not any more since organizations like the ABA have sought to protect the profits of their industry. Once again, the people were sold out for profits.

  17. Think about this for a moment. This man was arrested for informing citizens of their RIGHT to vote their conscience if they feel a law is unconstitutional or is being applied, (by a corrupted judiciary), unjustly…. Here comes the diamond bullet….. A f**king jury of his peers – fellow citizens CONVICTED HIM through their cultivated IGNORANCE!! PLEASE GOD! make the fall into the dust bin of history as RAPID AS POSSIBLE for Sewer Nation and this sorry-ass culture with it’s ignorant and wholly pathetic citizenry!

    When a jury acquitted those cops who, (ON VIDEO), beat a defenseless Kelly Thomas to death, I was stunned. No more, I’m nauseous.

  18. All you had to do is put the judge and prosecutor’s contact details in this article, Activist Post, and let nature take it’s course…but you didn’t! This scumbag judge should have been trashed. He should be unable to buy groceries.

  19. “…Most Constitutionalists favor the jury system, provided jury nullification (a juror’s right to judge a law as unjust, oppressive, or inapplicable to any particular case) is in force. However, even if jury nullification were restored, juries would still render decisions based upon each jury’s collective standard of morality or immorality. “A jury drawn from the [Biblically] uninstructed population is no better equipped to administer the just requirements of God’s law than a corrupt judge.”35 A jury awarded $2.3 million to Stella Liebeck when she burned herself with McDonald’s coffee, and a jury found O.J. Simpson innocent on all charges. Although it might be argued that it only takes one juror to dissent and prevent a “railroad job,” most people lack the independence and resolution to resist the will of a majority. More often than not, today’s jurors reflect the type of people we are warned against in Exodus 23:

    ‘Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment.’ (Exodus 23:2)

    “Juries produce, at best, erratic justice. Without Yahweh’s law as the standard, jury decisions are based upon the capricious morality of its members. Nothing demonstrates this better than Jesus’ trial by a jury of His peers with Pontius Pilate presiding. The prevailing immorality of the day demanded Jesus be crucified even though He was clearly innocent….

    “The constitutional right of a trial by a jury of “impartial” peers is regarded by Americans – especially Christian Constitutionalists – as one of the last bulwarks against tyranny. If this is true, Yahweh (who is unquestionably a God of justice and liberty) would have included juries somewhere in His perfect law and righteous judgments. Surely, one of the reasons He did not provide for them is that juries (like elections) place government policy and juridical determinations in the hands of an unpredictable and unequally yoked public, the majority of whom are not Christian (Matthew 7:13)….”

    For more, see online Chapter 6 “Article 3: Judicial Usurpation” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.” Click on my name, then our website. Go to our Online Books page, click on the top entry, and scroll down to Chapter 6.

    Then find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the right-hand sidebar and receive a complimentary copy of a book that examines the Constitution by the Bible.

  20. Maybe sooner than later, better be sooner or the boomers will have busted

  21. ignorance is bliss for the justus system

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.