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:
Kick her off the bench!
The democrats would just rather that juries don’t really understand the Constutution anyway.
If she don’t like the constitution she shouldn’t be a judge because she has sworn to up hold the constitution.
MANY of our courts are ‘kangaroo’ courts, whether you want to admit it or not..
when you kill the bible and the constitution in usa, the devil will walk the land free
Impeach this unconstitutional judge now !!!!!
They must not know the law, is this on stenographer notes. If so appeal to a higher courts and have u r case dismissed as due processed
pos!
If true, judge must be removed. The law of our land, including our rights are rooted in the constitution. Judge is clueless or corrupt
I can see why it would “confuse” a jury..per the judge.Students aren’t being taught about the constitution or have a “civics” class like we used to.