Earlier this year, prosecutors charged Julian P. Heicklen, a retired chemistry professor, with jury tampering because he stood outside the federal courthouse in Manhattan providing information about jury nullification to passers-by. Given that I have been recommending nullification for nonviolent drug cases since 1995 — in such forums as The Yale Law Journal, “60 Minutes” and YouTube — I guess I, too, have committed a crime.

The prosecutors who charged Mr. Heicklen said that “advocacy of jury nullification, directed as it is to jurors, would be both criminal and without constitutional protections no matter where it occurred.” The prosecutors in this case are wrong. The First Amendment exists to protect speech like this — honest information that the government prefers citizens not know.

Laws against jury tampering are intended to deter people from threatening or intimidating jurors. To contort these laws to justify punishing Mr. Heicklen, whose court-appointed counsel describe him as “a shabby old man distributing his silly leaflets from the sidewalk outside a courthouse,” is not only unconstitutional but unpatriotic. Jury nullification is not new; its proponents have included John Hancock and John Adams.

The doctrine is premised on the idea that ordinary citizens, not government officials, should have the final say as to whether a person should be punished. As Adams put it, it is each juror’s “duty” to vote based on his or her “own best understanding, judgment and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.”

In 1895, the Supreme Court ruled that jurors had no right, during trials, to be told about nullification. The court did not say that jurors didn’t have the power, or that they couldn’t be told about it, but only that judges were not required to instruct them on it during a trial. Since then, it’s been up to scholars like me, and activists like Mr. Heicklen, to get the word out.

Nullification has been credited with helping to end alcohol prohibition and laws that criminalized gay sex. Last year, Montana prosecutors were forced to offer a defendant in a marijuana case a favorable plea bargain after so many potential jurors said they would nullify that the judge didn’t think he could find enough jurors to hear the case. (Prosecutors now say they will remember the actions of those jurors when they consider whether to charge other people with marijuana crimes.)

There have been unfortunate instances of nullification. Racist juries in the South, for example, refused to convict people who committed violent acts against civil-rights activists, and nullification has been used in cases involving the use of excessive force by the police. But nullification is like any other democratic power; some people may try to misuse it, but that does not mean it should be taken away from everyone else.

How one feels about jury nullification ultimately depends on how much confidence one has in the jury system. Based on my experience, I trust jurors a lot. I first became interested in nullification when I prosecuted low-level drug crimes in Washington in 1990. Jurors here, who were predominantly African-American, nullified regularly because they were concerned about racially selective enforcement of the law.

Across the country, crime has fallen, but incarceration rates remain at near record levels. Last year, the New York City police made 50,000 arrests just for marijuana possession. Because prosecutors have discretion over whether to charge a suspect, and for what offense, they have more power than judges over the outcome of a case. They tend to throw the book at defendants, to compel them to plead guilty in return for less harsh sentences. In some jurisdictions, like Washington, prosecutors have responded to jurors who are fed up with their draconian tactics by lobbying lawmakers to take away the right to a jury trial in drug cases. That is precisely the kind of power grab that the Constitution’s framers were so concerned about.

In October, the Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia, asked at a Senate hearing about the role of juries in checking governmental power, seemed open to the notion that jurors “can ignore the law” if the law “is producing a terrible result.” He added: “I’m a big fan of the jury.” I’m a big fan, too. I would respectfully suggest that if the prosecutors in New York bring fair cases, they won’t have to worry about jury nullification. Dropping the case against Mr. Heicklen would let citizens know that they are as committed to justice, and to free speech, as they are to locking people up.

Paul Butler, a former federal prosecutor, is a professor of law at George Washington University and the author of “Let’s Get Free: A Hip-Hop Theory of Justice.”

Thousands of Mexicans changed the face of national and international politics May 8 in the world’s first mass protest against the drug war.

Read the rest of this excellent piece here.

The clock on the Torre Latinoamericana strikes 5:00 on April 6th as the ragtag group that fills the esplanade of the Bellas Artes museum yells ‘No more blood!’ and ‘Down with Felipe Calderon!’. This is not a common place to begin a protest, but this march was called by poets and artists, friends, followers, and men and women who read the poems and articles of Javier Sicilia. They all believe that poetry and art will triumph over death.

After the murder of his son and six of his friends on March 28 in Cuernavaca, the poet and social activist published “An Open Letter to Politicians and Criminals,” in which he condemns Calderon’s war as being poorly planned, poorly executed, poorly directed, and for putting the country in a state of emergency. In his letter he also called upon his fellow Mexicans to struggle for peace and justice.
For the rest of the article, please click here.

To fight the drug war in Mexico the US military conducted specialized trainings both inside and outside of the country with a focus on combating “narco-terrorism” and “counterinsurgency” conflicts, according to a recently declassified report from the State Department and Department of Defense. The document (PDF), which details foreign military training in the 2009 fiscal year, sheds more light on to the kind of instruction Mexican soldiers were receiving from the United States as violence and deaths continued to increase in the country. This includes the deployment of “mobile training teams” that were used to teach special forces combat techniques. Click here for the entire article and links to original State Dpt. and DoD report.

The US Northern Command’s Work With Mexican Armed Forces Has ‘Increased Dramatically’ and May Be Expanded

By Erin Rosa
Special to The Narco News Bulletin

October 22, 2010

A vivid report on a journalist’s flight from the Mexican military to the United States. This is the same Mexican military which the Obama Administration and the Democratic Congress are funding even more than Bush did!

Quote: “Colombian history demonstrates the State’s security agencies have considered as enemies those from society who are committed to the defence and promotion of human rights. Additionally, since February 2004, the DAS has substantially increased its persecution of human rights organisations. In this respect, it created special strategic-intelligence groups with the purpose of structurally persecuting human rights organisations as they were considered to be “a threat or risk to national security.”

Within this context, the DAS decided to undertake intelligence activities against CAJAR through a very laborious, extensive and sophisticated operation called OPERATION TRANSMILENIO, the funds for which came out of a heading designated for RESEVERED EXPENSES. This OPERATION TRANSMILENIO has consisted in gathering information on the Lawyers’ Collective and its members, and specifically information on activities relating to human rights defence work, international cooperation, and the organisation’s financial records. During this time, the DAS has carried out diverse intelligence activities against members of CAJAR, including the identification of their nuclear families and the gathering of biographical economic, financial and work-related information. Political and psychological profiles were also developed and fingerprint records were kept. The DAS kept track of the members’ routines and travel routes and surveillance was carried out throughout the country (along with ongoing surveillance at set points by way of apartment rentals). Photographs and video have also been taken of the lawyers and their families at home and in their places of work. Telephone conversations and email communication have also been intercepted on a massive scale. Lastly, records have been kept on their migratory movements and their national and international contacts have been cross-referenced. The DAS has obtained this information from the government protection program for human rights defenders, public and private institutions, and what were called “human and technical sources.” The Colombian State Employs the Administrative Department of Security Against Human Rights Organizations”

The rest of this frightening document by the Lawyers Collective here.

From article:

“I feel that this particular controversy would not have the traction that it does if it were not for the direct role of the U.S. military, especially in light of the turmoil in Oaxaca,” said Evergreen State College’s Grossman. “Oaxaca is not just any old state in Mexico and southern Mexico is not just any old region in the Americas, it’s an area that has had significant repression in very recent years against indigenous peoples by federal forces funded by the U.S.”
. . .
Adding to the specter of U.S. and state violence and repression in the region, the U.S Joint Forces Command released a report in November 2008 that stated Mexico risked becoming a failed state and, if that were to be the case, it would demand U.S. intervention. Meanwhile, the U.S. House passed a spending bill on February 25 which allocates $410 million for the Merida Initiative, a militarization project modeled after Plan Colombia, to “carry out counter-narcotics, counter-terrorism, and border security measures.”

To the Editor:
Op-Ed Columnist: Cocaine and White Teens (January 10, 2009)

In “Cocaine and White Teens” (column, Jan. 10), Charles M. Blow writes that white teenagers use more cocaine than black teenagers, and cites a ratio of 10 to 1 of white versus black teenagers entering drug treatment for crack and cocaine use.

A significant but missing statistic is white versus black teenagers entering the criminal justice system.

F.B.I. statistics for many years have shown more whites than blacks arrested for drugs, while more blacks than whites are incarcerated. We should not lose sight that our war on drugs has been a war on people of a certain color. Howard Josepher

New York, Jan. 16, 2009

The writer is president of Exponents, which helps people affected by drug addiction.

Here’s the original article.

The organization, which was established two and a half years ago when the journalist was killed by Mexican paramilitaries while covering a teachers’ strike, has called on Congress and the Bush State Department to aid in obtaining justice for their murdered friend. They described the Obama-Calderon meeting as “an important opportunity to move forward not only on Brad’s case but also on many Mexican political prisoners’ cases.”

They asked callers to Obama’s transition team to urge Obama to ask explicitly about Brad’s case and those of other innocent people arrested, raped or killed (in Atenco, Juarez, Chiapas, Oaxaca and elsewhere).

Manuel Red Pebble Perez, Coordinator of Binational Indigenous Peoples’ Outreach for Friends of Brad Will, declared “(t)he United States should not be supplying lethal aid to unaccountable ’security’ forces in Mexico or Latin America that have shown themselves incapable even to bring to justice the Mexican government paramilitaries witnessed in broad daylight killing our colleague, Brad Will”. He pointed reporters to the report by Reporters without Borders (see: http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=19485) and to the International Physicians for Human Rights forensic team’s findings which sited culpability of Mexican government paramilitaries for Mr. Will’s and others’ murders as ignored by Mexican State and Federal prosecutors.

Under pressure from the U.S. government for resolution of the case, the Mexican authorities have arrested and put out arrest warrants for 11 innocent people, at least 4 of whom courageously stepped forward with Brad’s parents to provide their eyewitness testimony to the Mexican govt. The Mexican government is now scapegoating these innocent people in a travesty of justice labeled by Kathy Will, Brad’s mother, as ‘absurd.’

Joy Ophelia, a spokeswoman for Friends of Brad Will said that “(t)he notorious corruption and lack of accountability of Mexican security forces and their widespread human rights abuses makes Bush’s Merida Initiative (aka Plan Mexico) a terrible, impractical idea, which Obama should discontinue.”

Background information:

Plan Mexico Backgrounder: http://americas.irc-online.org/am/5118

Witness to Brad Will’s Murder Denounces Recent Arrests
http://elenemigocomun.net/1704

“. . .Juan Manuel has been falsely charged with the homicide of U.S. journalist Bradley Roland Will. (H)e is . . .an active individual, committed to his community through his parish and municipality.”

Video: A Call to Action from the Family of Juan Manuel (one of the wrongly accused)
http://elenemigocomun.net/1928

President-elect Obama to Meet with President Calderón

WASHINGTON, D.C. – President-elect Barack Obama will meet with
Mexico’s President Felipe Calderón on Monday, January 12. The meeting
will be in Washington, DC at the Mexican Cultural Institute. There is
a long-standing tradition, since 1980, of U.S. presidents meeting with
the Mexican president prior to being sworn in to underscore the
important relationship between the United States and Mexico. This
meeting is in keeping with that tradition.

###