What to make of the latest legal twists in the Vernon Hershberger raw milk saga? I thought about trying to doctor a photo of Hershberger to put on the site so it would look like a human pretzel, because that’s what he seems to have become–a legal pretzel.
Yesterday there was a hearing about whether Hershberger should have filed an administrative appeal with the WI Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection (DATCP) shortly after the state attempted to shut down his farm store serving a food club, in 2010, via a holding order.
The good news is that more than 100 people braved blizzard conditions to attend the hearing in the Sauk County Courthouse in Baraboo.
The bad news? Most of those attending the hearing probably couldnt tell you what the hell the hearing was really about. The whole thing, as I understand it, is about whether Hershbergers lawyers can call witnesses to testify about the benefits of raw milk. The state is arguing he cant, since he didnt exercise his right to appeal the holding order back in 2010. Hershberger says his religious beliefs prohibited him initiating a legal action against the state in the form of the appeal. But dont hold me to what Ive just said.
There was all kinds of maneuvering yesterday by the state prosecutors, the defense lawyers, and the judge…about Biblical statements prohibiting covering legal activities, which Hershberger gives precedence over bureaucratic rules, and which he is arguing is part of his religious freedom guaranteed by the U.S. Constitutions First Amendment. There was arguing as well about whether Hershberger did indeed appeal a second holding order placed on his farm, and whether that showed he wasn’t as wedded to his principles as he now claims.
But the real decision making is likely to come down to much the same considerations that drove WI Judge Patrick Fiedler to rule a year-and-a-half ago that, under Wisconsin law, we dont have the right to the food of our choosing…hell, we dont even have the right to the milk of our own cow.
The judge in the Hershberger case, Guy Reynolds, concluded yesterdays hearing with an order to both sides–he wants the prosecution and defense to file briefs on whether the initial holding order filed by the state against Hershberger in 2010 was subject to appeal according to Wisconsin statutes. That says to me that Judge Reynolds is looking for specific provisions in Wisconsin law to hang his hat on that Hershberger should have filed an appeal…much like Judge Fiedler hung his hat on Wisconsin law to conclude that the states laws about dairy permits reign supreme, even overrule any fundamental right we may have to feed ourselves and our families the foods of our choosing.
I find myself thinking back to the earlier days of this case, when Hershberger sat in court at the defense table holding a Bible, saying he was defending himself and the Bible was his law. Part of his reasoning was he didnt want to be drawn into the convoluted legal process, “not to join in their game…Once they get you in their game, they’ll suck you dry. Boy, did Hershberger understand well how thoroughly convoluted and distorted our legal system is.
Im not saying he shouldnt have engaged lawyers to represent him–he really had no choice if he wanted to avoid being railroaded into a guilty verdict. But he understood early on that the case was about something very straightforward: his right to sell food directly to a private group of individuals, under contract.
I guess I worry about whether that basic question will ever make it out from under from the morass of legalities now being argued about, to be judged by a jury.
Then again, there is a lot to be said for the argument that, regardless of how the case turns out, Hershberger and his lawyers are making the state sweat through what has to be a terribly uncomfortable process. The longer the case goes on, and the more people brave blizzards to be in the courtroom, the more people will be asking themselves: Now, why is the state going to such great lengths to penalize a humble dairy farmer who has never made anyone sick, and every day makes lots of people more healthy?
In the meantime, though, DATCP appears to be trying to consolidate its authority under Judge Fiedler’s decision that essentially gave the agency carte blanche over dairy farms. One farmer told me recently that the agency is issuing a “Notice” to dairy farmers holding Grade A dairy licenses who are found to be selling raw milk. The “Notice” forbids any raw milk sales for three years. If the farmer is caught selling raw milk within the three years, the license is revoked, essentially putting the farmer out of business, since most Wisconsin dairy farmers who sell raw milk also have Grade A dairy licenses.
These “Notices,” which are understood to have been issued to at least a couple of farmers, provide for no negotiation or appeal. And there appears to be no acknowledgment that Wisconsin law allows “incidental” sales of raw milk by holders of Grade A licenses. If the state wins its case against Hershberger, look for DATCP to consolidate its authority over dairies so it is complete. That helps explain further why the stakes are so high, and the legal path so frustratingly meandering. Every legal point is being fought tooth and nail for advantage.
(Additions have been made to this post since it was first published.)
For those interested in the big frame of reference = addressing whence cometh this illogical opposition to normalization of the market for raw milk?, I highly recommend the article The Disruptor in March 2013 Wired magazine. Clayton Christensen says Smart companies fail because they do everything right. They cater to high-profit margin customers and ignore the low end of the market, where disruptive innovations emerge from. His theory applies perfectly to the decline of the dairy industry. The article has a cute quote : I wasnt going to be suckered into telling Andy Grove what he should do with Intel. I knew nothing about semi-conductors. Instead of telling him what to think, I told him how to think.
Last week our private dairy purchased a couple of new cows, sight unseen. When they showed up, the herdsman told the delivery guy : the managers arent going to like those cows. Better load them right back up and take them back. Which he did. Reason being ; they had come from a commercial dairy, where their tails had been cut off. We never told our shareholders what to think they come to us already thinking for themselves. We then tell them how we think about farming dairying in particular. Consumers demanding humane treatment of the cows will soon reach a tipping point in public opinion. Well before it does, the Stalin-ist model, predicated as it is upon confined animal feeding operations, will fail for the reasons explained in Christensens book The Innovators Dilemma.
How awful that he is subjected to the tortures of the system he pegged correctly.
“The longer the case goes on, and the more people brave blizzards to be in the courtroom…….”
Keeping the whole ordeal in the public’s eye will keep tptb under a microscope. The feed lot dairies can never produce safe raw milk, and the movement for healthier foods, including raw dairy is only growing. TPTB can never compete with the healthy foods. Why would the gmo people spend so much money on the labeling issues if it were safe? People don’t want it in their foods and if it is on the label chances are, less people would buy it.
http://news.yahoo.com/health-officials-1-50-school-kids-autism-040223285.html
Begin forwarded message:
From: Gayle
Date: March 20, 2013, 11:22:14 PM CDT
To: Gayle Loiselle
Subject: Vernon’s Hearing
Proving Wisconsinites are a hardy lot, I joined over 100 other folks who drove through a major snow storm to show support for Vernon Hershberger and attend his pre trial hearing. What stood out for me is that as people lined the hall they were smiling, inspired by the strength and conviction of Vernon and his family, and feeling good about taking a stand for food freedom. Here’s my version of what happened.
As the proceedings started, defense argued that Vernon had a right to an evidentiary hearing. That he had the right to tell his story to the jury, not the states version of the ” facts” but the actual truth. That they needed to hear whole story; Including the health benefits of this food, how DATCP destroyed 2000 pounds of milk claiming it was adulterated, the fact that this food belonged to his members, and that Vernon believed it to be a sin to let all that good nutritious food rot.
The State argued that Vernon violated a hold order placed on the food. They said his religious beliefs were irrelevant because an order is an order, that Vernon’s religious beliefs were insincere and inconsistent and did not prevent him from filing an appeal to the hold order. Defense argued there are many references in the bible that speak to the principles by which Vernon lives and made that decision. Having seen Vernon represent himself with bible in hand several times, the Judge called a brief recess giving the defense the opportunity to confer with several people who pulled out bibles. They found several specific scriptures to prove the point.
After that, there was a lot of back and forth about issues the Judge eventually claimed didn’t technically pertain to the reason for the hearing. It took a long time to sort out that the DATCP issued 3 separate hold orders, and the argument then became about whether the hold orders were in fact appealable. What came out was that the first hold order issued on June 2, did not state that the order was appealable. And that the 2nd and 3rd hold orders did. It was violation of the first hold order that was at issue.
Defense claimed the statute says the 1st hold order was not appealable, that it was an injunction giving the state 14 days to determine if the food was adulterated…which would make it an unappealable hold order.
The State argues Vernon had the right and chose not to appeal the hold order and then later insincerely claimed religious beliefs prevented him in doing so.
The judge told both sides to file briefs on what the statute means; was the first hold order that Vernon violated subject to appeal? Then of course they get to file responses to each others briefs and the Judge will make his ruling in a phone hearing on April 22. The trial is still scheduled for May 20-24.
In the end it was not about Vernon’s 1st amendment rights, but rather about what the statue governing hold orders really means. Because if the hold order was not appealable then Vernon not appealing because of his religious beliefs is irrelevant. Which is what the hearing was suppose to be about. And what baring his ruling will have on the trial nobody seems to know, not even the judge. Follow that? Keep in mind this hearing came about because the State did not want evidence on the health benefits of raw milk to be presented to the jury.
What I want to know is how was Vernon suppose to know what his rights were if it takes 9 or 10 lawyers and a judge to interpret the law?
I get it! They make up the rules as they go! There is a long history of biased cases that favor whomever makes the rules (and it isn’t average farmer Joe/Jane).
I’m so sorry Mr. Hershberger has to go through this. It must be agonizing for him. I’m grateful for his bravery, though. The pushing back from him and his supporters will only help the broader cause.
Gayle,
Thanks so much for your cogent description of what went on at the Hershberger hearing last week. In its crispness, your account makes clearer than any legal or political argument ever could how depressingly sidetracked we all have become from the real issues at hand. It’s perfectly understandable if the judge feels tangled in his own underwear. Everyone around him is as well. Everyone obviously needs to step back and figure out how to return to the issues at hand. But, then, I doubt the state wants to do that, for obvious reasons.
A legal pretzel is a very good way of describing the scenario.
This is not so much a struggle between Vernon and the state, as it is a struggle between our innate God given free will, and those who wish to subjugate us to their self-serving authority.
Vernons reverent faith in Gods authority has created a conundrum for the court. I think Vernon clearly understands that his dilemma is indicative of an ongoing millennial struggle with the principalities and powers or if you will forces and authorities that are maliciously at war with the natural order of Gods creation.
Ken
Assertion of property rights is the anti-dote to what’s going on here = red fascism
George Gordon went through all this, over the last 30 years. His opinions about how to deal with the govt. in a “takings action”, are on his website audio archive
I would doubt the tea was much of a contributing cause. It was the water. Did they test that theory? Doubtful. Also processed foods contain tap water…as does sodas, etc. So fluoride is obtained from numerous sources not just the home faucet. Fluoride also becomes more concentrated when you boil your water. Duh. It takes a long time for the bones to completely remodel themselves.
http://news.yahoo.com/too-much-tea-causes-unusual-bone-disease-222359924.html
There is no doubt, tptb will attempt to make some kind of example of Mr. Hershberger, so they can discourage others. I hope that this whole ordeal is kept in the public’s face, transparency. I do share what I learn with others.
I was really amazed that California voted down the gmo labeling.
Your right about making an example of Vernon, DATCP with FDA support/mandate are spending many thousands of tax payers dollars to convict him, thereby criminalizing raw milk distribution – which is the goal. This is not just a directive of DATCP or local government, this attack on raw milk in WI was initiated by the conventional dairy industry and their bought and paid for FDA. I have emails from 2009 between the FDA and DATCP talking about infiltrating milk buying clubs to find the suspected Amish source of raw milk. They name names of people who have become my friends through this fight. We’re just mons and dads trying to feed our kids healthy food, or we’re sick, trying to find strength and health. Its so ironic that they use public health concern as their battle cry.
So, yes, there are lots of folks from WI and around the country who have been and continue to work very hard to keep Vernon’s case in the public eye. And its working…there is a good amount of awareness here. Our biggest limiting factor is money. The opposition has deep pockets and professional marketing teams like what we saw in the CA GMO labeling fight. There is raw milk legislation being introduced in WI right now and the lobbying efforts against it have managed to turn the states biggest newspaper into their personal mouth piece.
But we are right. People are stepping up, professionals skilled in writing and PR, and artistic ability are joining the fight with everyday people who are volunteering countless hours on grass roots efforts. This is why over 100 people, many driving hours through a snow storm, came to show there support for Vernon AND their own right to choose what they eat. Thank you Sylvia, for your voice on this blog, and for spreading the word. Local level up is how we will win this fight!! Just look at the success in Maine!!
It appears that the scientific community accepts anecdotal evidence for them diagnosing autism, yet they don’t for improved health from raw dairy–follow the money. Screening seems to be asking questions from a check list; as if every kid is the same! I think it has been the parents that figured out that diet affects the autistic child and they have worked towards minimizing gut issues.
Doubtful they will admit the cause. Again follow the money. If genetics are a factor, it probably is linked to the huge amount of toxic vaccinations injected into kids. There was a court case a few years age, one or both parents were doctors, they sued, their child apparently did have a gene that was affected by vaccines and became autistic…..Does the health community check this before poking any kids? NO, they do not, so you don’t know what reaction your kids will have.
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/a-parents-guide-to-autism-spectrum-disorder/complete-index.shtml
http://www.disabilityscoop.com/2011/02/22/supreme-court-vaccine-ruling/12382/
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread918559/pg1
……………………………..
I was reading the Grassway motion for summary judgment from August 2011, which by the way is written very badly, sounds like it was written by the prosecution, and noticed an inconsistency.
……………………………..
It says a 2004 order states; Because the purpose of a milk producer license is to produce milk for the public, human food chain, the license (and therefore, any ownership interest) may not be used solely for the purpose of allowing purchase of non-pasteurized milk and/or milk products.
1. The state already said they consider the share owners, members of the general public because, for some reason, they don’t recognize their cow share contract.
2. They are saying that the members are purchasing without selling. How is that even possible?
3. They are admitting that they are attempting to prevent consumers from buying raw milk when the law only addresses the sale of raw milk and assumes consumers don’t want to purchase raw milk.
4. I assume they are saying raw milk is not milk otherwise the statement makes no since. When milk regulation first started pasteurized milk was not milk. We are allowing producers to redefine milk in their own image. I wonder where they obtained their creative license.
The Fiedler ruling is further convoluted because the Grassway suit and the Zinniner/Nourished by Nature/private individuals suit are actually seperate lawsuits that were combined because DATCP claimed that they were dealing with the same issues, so to save the state money and resources we should combine them in court. Either way it appears to be a non-issue for the state…this case has been in the appeal process for over a year. We the people aren’t letting it go though, Fiedler crossed a line when he said there is no right to produce and consume the foods of ones choice. In my opinion, that did more to fire up both activists and every day people in the food freedom movement than wining the case would have. Onward!
It is still amazing that so many still fall for the deep pocket/marketing ploys. There have been so many incidences, that has affected the public, yet they still follow like blind sheep. I think this is one aspect that may need to be looked into (the reasons may already be known by others)
This may be one small key, among many, that helps people to open their eyes and minds and make true informed choices. The scenario I usually see is: pink slime- the public finds out about it (never mind it came to light years before), now they say they don’t want it, and some stores say they aren’t selling it in their ground beef…yet it is still being sold in their stores in many forms..also people know about the nasty conditions at factory farms yet they say nothing (or maybe squeak an out-rage) and still buy the tainted foods… That makes no sense to me. Are they so drugged up they can’t think for themselves?
If we have nanny state laws soon he’ll get his wish about parents not being able to feed their children what they want to feed them. I wonder how well that will go over? No single agency will be able to monitor what parents do, so that leaves the food market wide open for complete overhaul by the phake phood producers/criminals – which they will do by eliminating organic foods and making GMO foods the only thing available. I don’t see how this can go any other way is nanny state laws are implemented.
Also, I would recommend leaving the legal strategy for Vernon to the lawyers. DATCP has shown little interest in whether raw milk is safe or not, they just want it banned to please their handlers.
“The Dairy Association and Wisconsin Cheesemakers are against the bill. They urged lawmakers not to sign on or support raw milk legislation”
Imagine that! rawmilkmike you were spot on!
http://www.fox47.com/newsroom/top_stories/videos/the-raw-milk-debate-continues-5758.shtml
http://www.farmersontrial.com/category/farmer-profiles/vernon-hershberger/
http://host.madison.com/news/local/writers/jessica_vanegeren/raw-milk-debate-returning-to-court-legislature/article_abd2c4ae-8c20-11e2-8cdc-001a4bcf887a.html
“Grothman, R-West Bend, has been an advocate of legalizing raw milk for years, including speaking out against Doyle after he abruptly vetoed its sale despite earlier signals that he would approve it.”
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/01/trial-postponed-for-farmer-targeted-by-raw-milk-police-urgent-update-2529146.html
http://healthimpactnews.com/2012/wisconsin-senator-dale-schultz-holds-up-raw-milk-bill-says-raw-milk-supporters-fringe/
http://realfoodlaw.com/2013/03/19/update-on-vernon-hershbergers-wisconsin-raw-milk-case-yesterdays-court-hearing/
……………………………….
Definition of State: “The people of a state, in their collective capacity, considered as the party wronged by a criminal deed; the public; as in the title of a case, “The State v. A. B.””
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/05/on-the-fly-german-doctors-find-t.html
Then there’s this from american doctors: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1106483#t=articleTop
Mega uber paragraphs to say what was summed up in the last three. Doctors and scientists love words, don’t they?