In a recent pre-trial hearing in Xenia, Ohio, a judge agreed with a prosecutor’s motion to prohibit the defendant from mentioning the Constitution or the constitutionality of the law he was charged with violating.
Judge Catherine Barber stated “there will be no mentioning of the Constitution” to the defendant, Virgil Vaduva.
The prosecutor made the claim that mentioning the Constitution “will confuse the jury,” to which Vaduva replied that uttering words on a public sidewalk, his panhandling charge, constitutes free speech.
MOVE TO PAGE 2:
I live in Ohio haven’t heard anything about this
If true, totally UNConstitutional.
What town i live in ohio
That would be un-constitutional.
Do you think it is time to remove this judge? Sure seems like it!
then FIRE her the constitution is her job to up hold & to defend so if she can’t do her job FIRE her asap she doesn’t deserve her job if she can’t say the words
This case is over panhandling
Yeah if true she’s lost her authority and job.
The Coit Room IS NOT HERS ,, Personally It US that OARTICUKAR STATE, She RESIDENCE Over the Count Room to MAKE SURE GOOD JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL…She IS Supposed to OFFER Her Expertise in MAKING SURE the EYES of MS. JUSTICE PREVAILS, According to LAW BOODS, U.S.Constitution, Stare Laws…NOT her Personal Religious Belief in her RELIGIOUS BELIEF…
.SEPERATION Of CHURCH & STATE! And NOT ILLEGAL Sharia Law!
She needs to be fired asap!