First, the Wisconsin prosecutors pursuing raw milk farmer Vernon Hershberger went after jury nullification, and convinced a judge to instruct jurors in his upcoming trial they can’t side with the accused farmer if they disagree with the laws he is accused of violating.
Next, the Wisconsin prosecutors tried a highly unusual move to subpoena three news reporters to testify against Hershberger.–this time the judge refused to go along.
Now, the Wisconsin prosecutors are pushing the judge hearing the case to instruct the jury that they need only determine Hershberger violated the law, and ignore the critical issue of criminal intent.
A hearing on this last issue comes up Friday before Sauk County Judge Guy Reynolds, and Hershberger’s lawyers are fighting hard against this latest state maneuver.
This case is taking on all the trappings of a serious murder or drug trafficking case, as the state is clearly devoting huge resources to gaining every possible legal advantage in preparation of the trial’s scheduled start Jan. 7. As just another indication, some 70 witness are expected to be called.
The case against Vernon Hershberger stems from his refusal in the spring of 2010 to abide by an ordered shutdown of his farm store by the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP). In December 2011, the state filed four misdemeanor charges–with potential penalties of up to two years in jail and $10,000 in fines–against Hershberger for allegedly violating the states dairy and retailing laws, as well as defying the holding order barring sales of raw milk and other foods. Hershberger has argued that he doesnt sell food at retail, but rather distributes to members of a private food club he established. Moreover, there is no retail license available to him that allows him to make raw milk available to food club members.
DATCP, via the Wisconsin Attorney General, has proposed that instructions to the jury require only a determination the farmer broke the law. Thus, its instructions for dealing with one of the charges, operating a dairy farm as a milk producer without a license, would be as follows:
Elements of the Crime the State Must Prove
1. The defendant was engaged in the operation of a dairy farm as a milk producer.
2. The defendant did not have a valid license issued by the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection for that dairy farm.
As part of Hershberger’s opposition, one of his lawyers, Elizabeth Rich, has set forth a different set of proposed jury instructions for that same charge, in response to the state filing. It goes as follows:
Elements of the Offense:
1. From February 15, 2010 until June 3, 2010, the defendant owned and operated a dairy farm;
2.During this time frame the defendant sold and distributed milk from the dairy farm to ‘consumers’;
3.During this time frame, the Defendant did not have a milk producers license;
4.The Defendant knew that he needed a milk producers license to carry out his operation of the dairy farm.
It is the addition of item #4 that is key, Rich argues in a brief opposing the states effort to leave out any need to show intent. She is suggesting that Hershberger unknowingly violated the state’s dairy laws for several months, and once he realized his error, he formalized the private food club arrangements.
Rich’s brief on behalf of Hershberger uses several legal precedents to argue that scienter, or criminal intent, is a necessary element of each of the four counts charged. After arguing the pros and cons of the various other cases used by the state and by her, Rich concludes that the jury ust be instructed that it must find the defendant had criminal intent in order to find him guilty of the crimes at issue.
DATCP’s masters at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration must be putting huge pressure on DATCP to get a conviction in this case, because the agency clearly has one or more lawyers essentially devoting full time to pursuing every possible angle to gain a legal advantage against Hershberger. I would presume the Wisconsin Attorney Generals lawyers are in touch with U.S. Justice Department lawyers, obtaining guidance and legal resources, as well.
They are throwing everything they have at a humble Bible-carrying farmer to avoid a repeat of the Alvin Schlangen acquittals in September. These are desperate people in Wisconsin, so it’s important food rights advocates fight back with everything they have. One of the most important weapons is community, and demonstrating to the jury that the community is behind Hershberger, so he can continue to supply his food club members with the nutrient-dense food they need for good health. The trial begins Monday morning at 8:30, Jan. 7, at the Sauk County Courthouse in Baraboo, WI.
**
What makes the DATCP obsessiveness with the upcoming Hershberger trial especially ironic is that the agency’s big sister at the federal level, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, has for four years now blatantly ignored a petition filed by Mark McAfee of Organic Pastures Dairy Co. seeking a change in agency rules on raw milk. The petition, filed in December 2008, sought an exemption to the FDAs prohibition on interstate sale of raw milk whereby raw milk that can be legally sold in one state can be transported across state lines and delivered to a customer in another state where raw milk sales are also legal; thus, OPDC would be able to sell its milk in Arizona.
So McAfee has filed suit in federal court seeking an order to force the FDA to act on the petition within thirty days of a judges order.
***
“First, the Wisconsin prosecutors pursuing raw milk farmer Vernon Hershberger went after jury nullification, and convinced a judge to instruct jurors in his upcoming trial they can’t side with the accused farmer if they disagree with the laws he is accused of violating.”
That such lies could possibly intimidate the jury is another example of how moribund democracy education is in America. This highlights how part of our responsibility and need is to educate people about how, as jurors, they have the right and duty to nullify unjust laws*, while to cravenly obey false instructions from a rogue judge is bad citizenship (and bad for their self-interest if they’re not among the rich).
*Who decides whether a law is unjust? Well, where does sovereignty lie? Is it with the people or with unaccountable, alien elites? The fact is that only the people, for example as jurors, can legitimately decide this question. A judge could rightfully only advise a jury, never bark orders at it. He’s their servant, not their boss. All this is if one believes in democracy. The only alternative is Hobbesian might-makes-right. We see how the system’s view of “law” is of the latter character. In the end, law is never anything but the servant of community power, or the weapon of usurped hierarchical power.
The struggle for food freedom, as well as a thousand other struggles, proves this every day.
I’m glad to hear about Mark McAfee’s suit on the FDA petition. It’s ridiculous that the FDA has been ignoring this for four years.
I hope Mark sticks it to the FDUh shysters. Really, though, they can get away with almost anything so again I’m not going to be surprised by anything that happens.
Past, Present and Future
http://datcp.wi.gov/uploads/About/pdf/Food_Regulation_Wisconsin.pdf
Disabuse you-self of that programming you got in the public fool system, at least enough to find out that the united States of America is a Republic … regardless of all the commies who pretend it’s a democracy
part of the intent of its founders, was, and stil is, that the jury OF ONE”S PEERS ( don’t forget that part) is a “mini-Parliament”. In practice, a jury certainly DOES make law, by way of precedent articulating the moral standards of the community
Educating people about our food and water supply contamination and the soil contamination will spread the word and help make change.
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/roundup-herbicide-linked-overgrowth-deadly-bacteria
Surprise surprise
MRSA in bulk tank? Do you think the US govt will inform the US public of any “pathogens” found in US bulk tanks?
“Vitamin D toxicity redefined: vitamin K and the molecular mechanism.
Masterjohn C.
Source
Weston A. Price Foundation, 4200 Wisconsin Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20016, United States. ChrisMasterjohn@gmail.com”
Wow, the govt gets their information from Weston Price…..
Trade and Consumer Protection
). The following are what I consider the most significant arguments:
You can’t convict a man who has done nothing wrong.
Even though it is Vernon that would do the time it is the people of Wisconsin who in the end are the defendants in this case.
Food regulations are written for consumers not producers so you can’t convict a man who represents the consumer and Vernon Hershberger clearly represents the consumer and DATCP by law does not. DATCP’s board is required by law to be make up of food processors and at present has no consumer representation.
Our food regulations were not written to limit consumers food choices and were never intended to force consumers to buy what they don’t want. So I don’t believe our constitutional rights or DATCP’s authority need to be argued at this time.
Our Wisconsin Attorney General, the district attorney, DATCP, and this court all work for the people of Wisconsin. Under what premise does the court prosecute a man who obviously represents the Wisconsin consumer.
Personally, as a laymen, I don’t believe Vernon has broken the letter or intent of the law which would make discussing jury nullification and Vernon’s intent counterproductive.
Food safety is irrelevant and discussing it only serves to make DATCP the defendant. Having a judge apologize by saying he is only treating Vernon like anyone else makes the judge the defendant. In either case Vernon is exonerated.
DATCP’s action on incidental sales means they come to court with unclean hands. By illegally preventing the sale of raw milk DATCP has caused the problem that brings us to court today.
The court should not give creditability to raw milk’s competitors. When consumers go directly to the farm to get raw milk for the health of their families and do their own inspections(which by the way hold farmer to much higher standards than DATCP) they compete with other health food providers, distributors, processors, drug companies, DATCP, the CDC, and the entire health care industry.
Let me close by saying this: It is the court’s responsibility to protect the citizens of Wisconsin from DATCP and the food processors they represent.
http://datcp.wi.gov/uploads/About/pdf/Food_Regulation_Wisconsin.pdf
http://datcp.wi.gov/uploads/About/pdf/Food_Regulation_Wisconsin.pdf
I posted it because it describes the legal intent of our food regulations. Our food regulations were never intended to be used to limit food choice.
Of course, you’re right about the fact that the legal intent for food regulation has been completely misconstrued by the *authorities*. That’s the function they perform the best!
http://www.westonaprice.org/mentalemotional-health/pursuit-of-happiness
And it was written back in 2009!
Personally, Ora, I don’t think *they* give two hoots if we’re watching and/or paying attention. They have no reason to care because of their circular thinking capabilities. They’re right, we’re wrong. That’s how THEIR reasoning and logic work for them. There may be more of us but we obviously lack “authority” and ultimately the courts have the last say. Strange that they even care to hear both sides of a story anymore, since they have such an obvious agenda.
Watch the preview and make sure to share it with your friends.
“Let Them Eat Grass” the full length DVD featuring Vernon Hershberger should be available in early January. All proceeds from the sales will go towards his legal defense.
Do you feel and think that governments have the right to deprive us of our
Constitutional right to grow, have and eat healthy food? Do you agree that
they can force you and me to eat toxically-produced pseudo food that will
eventually collect in our bodies and cause disease in most of us?
We at Right To Choose Healthy Food work hard to preserve our
Constitutional rights to healthy food. We do what we can to stop
government actors including politicians and judges in the pockets of big
agriculture and the processed-food industries from eliminating family
farmers.
The Vernon Hershberger family is one.
Wisconsin State government charged him with producing and selling milk without license and permits. However, only owners of the of the farm consume the food produced for them by the Hershberger family. The food is stringently and safely produced just as the owners want their food produced for themselves.
Governments have no business in this family-neighborhood farm where no food is distributed to the public.
The foods the farm produced have never harmed anyone and there is no scientific evidence that proves it could harm anyone. The State is acting like mafia saying, “Do things our way, pay us for allowing you to feed yourselves, but still in a few years, we will bankrupt you and close your farm.”
The families who own the Hershberger family farm are independent, caring for themselves. They have harmed no one, there are no victims, no crime. They act to protect themselves because governments are not protecting the food supply. In fact, they aid and abet the poisoning of our food supply.
Many of the farm-owners became farm-owners because processed industrial foods made them or their children very ill. Now that they have delicious health-promoting raw milk and other healthy-grown foods,they are no longer ill. There is no better science than that evidence.
Please join the members of Right To Choose Healthy Food in defeating government actors, including judges, from depriving us of our Constitutional rights to grow, have and eat healthy foods with our informed and intelligent choices.
Support the Hershbergers, you and your family’s rights to healthy food
by coming to the trial at Baraboo Courthouse, Sauk County, Wisconsin
the week of January 7, 2013. It is a jury trial in which the judge is a referee and not judge of the case. People like you and I on the jury will judge the case. No matter what the law codes state, jurors have the right to nullify bad laws. It is a right in our Constitution. It is time to take our government powers back and out of the grips of power- and money-hungry corporate and government stooges behaving like mild-mannered mafia-criminals.
Additionally, you can support this food-rights movement by donating to
Right To Choose Healthy Food (RawMilk.org) and/or Farmer To Consumer Legal Defense Fund. Thank you for your common sense and intelligence that will allow us to regain our rights to be healthy.
The courts as a whole have already proven they accept no such responsibility, and instead see their responsibility as being the exact opposite of this. (A few rogue decisions notwithstanding.)
So when your idea of convincing the courts to be Better Courts (and from there in some convoluted fashion, the Better Courts can then force the food police to be more accountable to “the law”; of course this too has already been proven not to work, as when the the USDA directly defied the federal court on GMO sugar beets) doesn’t work, then what will you be willing to advocate and do? Just something to think about.
I’m afraid your elitist and anti-democracy notion of how the people need the courts to “protect them” (that is, the people must remain passive and merely abjectly beg for one element of elite hierarchy to protect us from another element) won’t work, has been historically proven not to work (only bottom-up organization and direct action has ever accomplished anything), and is unspeakably demeaning to us as human beings.
We can never emphasize enough that food production and distribution are naturally local/regional, and that by definition centralized governments and corporations can never play any constructive role, but are purely alien to the sector. They can only forcibly impose commodification and globalization.
I often wonder what makes these guberment thugs feel good about themselves when they look in the mirror… in the meantime, we need to do whatever we can to keep them honest, or at least semi-honest if shameless.
Doing the right thing on OUR part is never wrong, I didn’t mean to imply that at all. I just mean that if you’re waiting for *honesty* from the gubment, you’ll be waiting for a long time, I’m afraid.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2012.02978.x/abstract
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2012.03011.x/abstract
Follow the $$$
Ken