Grand Jury Abuse Against Animal Rights Activist

Lately the use and abuse of grand juries against social movements by the U.S. government is on the rise again. Some activists are resisting against these abuses and have chosen to be jailed in contempt for court for months instead of complying with a grand jury.

JORDAN HALLIDAY

Jordan Halliday, was arrested for contempt of court on March 13. He was subpoenaed as a "witness" *supposedly* to provide information involving the mink liberations in Utah. The questions which have been asked were also not related to the investigation. He was only asked personal questions such as about his friends and associations. In other words, the grand jury is being used as a fishing expedition about the activist community and protected political and legal activities.

As a result of being in jail, Jordan has lost his job and also has lost his apartment. Jordan has paid a high price to defend and stand up for his liberties.

For more information, visit:

SupportJordan.com

MySpace.com/SupportJordanHalliday

Lastly, this video is indebted to rawjvh's video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPeiOf8-JMg

Please send this video to others. It is precisely the ignorance regarding grand juries that insures their continued future usage and existence and abuse.

SCOTT DEMUTH & CARRIE FELDMAN

These activists have also resisted grand jury abuses and fishing expeditions. Carrie is currently in jail for contempt of court. For more information, visit http://davenportgrandjury.wordpress.com/

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• fact
• myth
• fur
• civil
• rights
• mink
• liberation
• front
• news
• farm
• cruelty
• abuse
• grand
• jury
• inquisition
• fbi
• witch
• hunt
• prosecutor
• resistance
• resister
• first
• fifth
• amendment
• constitution
• contempt
• habeas
• corpus
• supreme
• court
• democracy

[beavthetrapper]

it is a really old tv show or movie.

[JBMontgomery87]

Secret proceedings = Privacy.

Grand Juries are a great thing, and you should be glad you've held on to them in America. Yes, the odds are weighted on the side of the prosecutor - but then the purpose of the hearing is only to determine if the prosecutor has enough of a case to justify a trial, not to actually have one.

What would you prefer? The system which prevails elsewhere, where the prosecutor need not persuade ANYONE (ham sandwich or otherwise) and can indict you on his mere whim?