Prior Restraint? Forbidden in The U.S…… Just Not In Riverside County, CA

Tried To Destroy Everything She Had
September 6, 2018
Lumen Database – Ironic – But Cool!
September 8, 2018
Show all

Prior Restraint? Forbidden in The U.S…… Just Not In Riverside County, CA

MANY are questioning EXACTLY how it happened? How does PRIOR RESTRAINT happen when it is forbidden? I’m leaving it to those that investigate this sort of thing. But there is more harm done by Prior Restraint than to just me.

“The special harm attaching prior restraint is that the government can keep materials from reaching the public, so there can be no accountability, no judgement by the people that the power to suppress was wrongly exercised.” Randal Marlin

Here are some heartfelt responses to my unfortunate case of Prior Restraint: ( NONE of these responses came from me)

“The appellate courts need to smack this judge hard. Take the case and write a scathing opinion”

“Serious question about the judges who issue orders of this type — not only Judge ________, but also the judge in the Macauley case and others: Do they simply not understand the First Amendment? I’m really baffled how anyone — but especially a judge! — could issue such a broad prior restraint.

“The important question is what remedies are available against the judge who wrote this order. As long as judges who do these things are not themselves jailed, this type of outrage will continue to happen. Immunity of any kind should not exist.”

“Amy DiPierro’s excellent reporting on Tracy Zona’s defense to defamation proceedings in Palm Springs highlights the astounding decision of Judge _____________ finding her in contempt of court and sentencing her to five days in jail for disobeying an order not to put anything on the internet and for thereafter blogging that the she could _______________________.”

Well, she can, and she can also write about it.

The Supreme Court of the United States, in 1937, held that restraining all future publications is a violation of the First Amendment.

In 1972, the Supreme Court held that a defendant can say in open court before a jury that the court was biased, had prejudged the case and that petitioner was a political prisoner. The justices threw out a contempt finding on First Amendment grounds. That defendant swore viciously at the judge when being led out of the court after the contempt finding.

So, in my opinion, Zona has the right to do whatever she wants with the judge’s order and write about it for all to see.”

Thank you ALL for your vocal support in this matter.

Martin Luther King went to jail in Birmingham for contempt of court. In his Letter from a Birmingham Jail he said “ Our purpose when practising civil disobedience is to call attention to injustice or to an unjust law.”

I am not going to violate my stay as I have been given SOLID “COMFORTABLE” ADVICE that I should not.

But I will say this. A woman SHOULD BE ABLE TO TELL HER TRUE STORY IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and enable her to therefore protect the public.

PSS. Thank you GREATLY from the higher up on the east coast that called to say that I may now sleep soundly at night.

With that said: My weekend BEGINS: And I am going to have a martini!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *