Thursday, June 14, 2018

In screwy postmodern America, a crooked judge like Jerry Harmison Jr, of Missouri, can convict you of a "crime" without even saying what law you've broken

Jerry Harmison Jr.
Is it possible to be convicted of a crime in an American court for doing . . . well, nothing? Based on our experience with my wife Carol's "assault of a law enforcement officer (LEO)" case in Missouri, the answer is yes.

To examine that question, let's look at Judge Jerry Hamison Jr.'s judgment in Carol's case. (The judgment is embedded at the end of this post.) We invite you to check out Harmison's first paragraph. Does it say one word about what Carol is charged with? Nope.

Harmison spends the better part of six pages regurgitating the testimony of various witnesses (including Carol and me) and begins his analysis in the final paragraph on page 7. Best we can tell, this includes his primary reasons for reaching a guilty verdict:

The relevant evidence in this case is that the Greene County Deputies evicting Roger and Carol Shuler were acting in good faith. . . . [Note: Harmison is citing the so-called "good-faith exception," which defense lawyers routinely use in lawsuits alleging excessive force and Fourth Amendment violations against cops. Harmison cites civil law, which has nothing to do with this criminal case.] Captain Lynn keyed the door and started to push it open, announcing the identity of officers again. Carol Shuler resisted the door, but it was pushed open. Lieutenant [Christian] Conrad announced the identity of the deputies again. Regardless, Carol Shuler continued to push Lynn multiple times and tried to pull away from him to resist detention. Lynn eventually handcuffed Carol Shuler. Consequently, the court finds the defendant guilty of Count I beyond a reasonable doubt. Sentencing is scheduled for June 11, 2018 at 10:30 a.m. [Note: Sentencing, and the hearing of post-judgment motions has been continued to 10:30 a.m. on June 19.]

So, Harmison pronounces Carol guilty, but of what? He doesn't say. He makes no mention of the governing statute -- RSMo 565.083 (Assault of a law enforcement officer . . .  in the third degree.) He doesn't even describe the offense with which Carol was charged. So, we will do it for him:

A person commits the offense if:

Such person knowingly causes or attempts to cause physical contact with a law enforcement officer . . . without the consent of the law enforcement officer.

Harmison also does not bother to address Missouri case law, which has held that the key question is: Who initiated contact? (See State v. Armstrong, 968 SW 2d 154, Mo. Court of Appeals, 1998.) Jeremy Lynn stated twice -- in his written incident report and under oath on the courtroom stand -- that he caused and initiated contact with Carol, by grabbing her as he burst through the front door of our rented duplex apartment.

From reading the final paragraph of Harmison's judgment, you would think the central element of the offense was: Did the subject push the officer? But neither the statute nor the case law says a word about pushing someone. It's all about who "knowingly caused -- or initiated -- physical contact."

Well, Jeremy Lynn admits that he knowingly grabbed Carol, and in his written report, never said a word about her pushing him. In fact, he said she tried to pull away from him. Last time I checked, it is impossible to push someone and try to pull away from them at the same time.

So, we are left with this question: Is it a crime to push a police officer -- which Carol testified she did not do -- especially in this situation?

We will examine that in an upcoming post.

(To be continued)


Anonymous said...

I had read this judgment before but did not realize the judge does not name the offense for which he convicted Carol. Amazing.

Anonymous said...

What did she do, jaywalk? No way to tell from the judgment.

Anonymous said...

Doubt the judge even read the statute. Probably wouldn't have known the charge, except a bunch of cops showed up to testify. A joke, total joke.

Anonymous said...

This is probably part of the cover up. If you don't mention the alleged offense or the language of the statute . . . hey, that's a good way to cover up the fact that Carol did not commit the crime.

Anonymous said...

This judge must think that you and Carol, and your readers are stupid -- that we can't see through this garbage.

legalschnauzer said...

@8:57 --

I've seen that kind of conduct from judges at every level. I call it the Arrogance of the Judiciary. They think regular Americans aren't smart enough to see their rulings are a bunch of rubbish.

Anonymous said...

I hope readers will remember Harmison isn't just cheating Carol, Roger, and the public. He is using your taxpayer dollars to play his little con game. Those courts belong to citizens -- we pay for them -- not to crooked judges.

Anonymous said...

Pretty interesting that Harmison claims the cops were more "credible" witnesses than LS and the missues, but he says nothing about what he bases that on.

Does he think Carol's broken arm is a fake?

Anonymous said...

This is a very simple case. Dep. Harrison admits on p. 1 that the underlying rent-and-possession case was based on an interlocutory judgment. That's all you need to know. In order to move forward with execution on any kind of judgment, it must be final. LS has cited the Missouri law on this umpteen times.

The cops were on your property unlawfully, and they admit that. That means you were the victims of an unlawful search and seizure, violating the Fourth Amendment and meaning all evidence gathered from an unconstitutional search must be suppressed. The prosecution has no lawfully obtained evidence so this is an open-and-shut case. The prosecution has no case.

If Harmison isn't smart enough to figure that out, he has no business being on the bench.

Anonymous said...

Trust me, folks. We don't want a society where cops can come and go inside your home, as they please, without a court order. This is what happened to Carol and Roger, and the cops pointed guns at them and broke Carol's arm -- then, they lied about what they had done and brought criminal charges against HER.

This is getting real close to a kind of fascism that most of us thought could not happen here. But Judge Harmison is covering up the bad guys, and it is happening here.

Very, very serious stuff.

Anonymous said...

Only positive comments today folks. No criticisms of the way Carol handled herself in this case.

Anonymous said...

The judge said himself that the court file showed a motion to quash execution and notice of appeal was filed on 9-8-2015. How can a eviction take place the following day when a notice of appeal had been filed? I'm not a lawyer but common sense would led me to believe that no eviction should or could take place while a appeal was pending. Otherwise why would anyone file a appeal? How could a eviction be undone if the tenant won his/her case on appeal? Would the state go and find the tenant, load up all his stuff and move him back into the unit they just had evicted him from? No of course not. That's why I'm thinking a big time mistake here on states part. My Perry Mason thinking is the state had no legal reason to be on your property that day. That in fact what we have here is trespassing, breaking and entering, kidnapping, assault, the list gones on. The sad fact is that all this will stand because we no longer live in a county of laws. Also since when did the police start taking phone calls as facts? So I can call the law, say that my name is John Smith and I live at 123 Main St Anylocal Town USA and that I hate cops and the next one I see I'm going to run over with my car. So after receiving this call, the police can go to main st and when I pull out of the driveway on my way to work,the police can shoot me dead because I was in a car and that I had said I was going to use that car as a deadly weapon? Also when did we start accepting the words of family members as fact? It's a new way to order a hit on a family member. Just call the law, tell them your brother is a anti government madman who's on record as wanting to kill all law enforcement. Sit back and watch one less family member you have to share the family farm with, when mom&pop passes away. But, wait why wait on old age to take mom&pop out of the picture, I can get the police to do it today and have the family farm in the morning all for myself, where is that phone, when I need it? This is just unreal what the did to you and your wife. We all should all be out in the street today protesting. This is NOT American!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I feel so sorry for you and sorry for all of us. Because what they did to you, and got away with it yesterday, they can and WILL do to any of us today:-(

Anonymous said...

This judge must be fond of brownshirts because that's exactly what he's creating.

Anonymous said...

I know a few things about tenant-landlord law in Missouri, and when you file a Notice of Appeal and pay whatever fees are required -- as you apparently did -- execution of the eviction is stayed by operation of law.

There is only a 10-day period for filing the Notice of Appeal, so there isn't time to go back and forth to various courts to get a stay order. If you do what you are supposed to do, it's automatically stayed.

Any deputy who deals with these things should know that.

That's why the Court of Appeals sent that letter and had it in your file on 9/9/15, the day of the eviction. That court was saying, "These people have filed a proper Notice of Appeal, the case is under our jurisdiction now (not that of the trial court), and execution is stayed by operation of law.

legalschnauzer said...

@11:54 --

Thanks for an important comment, with many profoundly important points. I hope everyone will read it. A few thoughts:

(1) Yep, it's right there near the bottom of the front page; the judge admits we filed a Notice of Appeal and Motion to Quash Execution.

(2) This whole thing was done by various people calling the cops or 911 and making claims that no one ever attempted to investigate or verify. What if you wanted to buy a piece of property from someone, and they refused to sell it. This would be a great way to resolve it in your favor. Place calls to the cops and 911, say the landowner has issued threats against them, and they had better come and take care of him. Presto, the landowner is dead, and you've got the property you wanted.

(3) For the record, personnel from Burrell Behavioral Health placed the 911 call on 8/12/15. That was almost a full month before the scheduled eviction, and cops had all that time to investigate anything they wanted regarding yours truly. They didn't investigate a thing. For almost a month, public records indicate they didn't take the threat seriously. They only started to take it seriously on the morning of the eviction.

(4) You've got Missouri law down cold stone. No eviction can take place when an appeal is pending, and the judge admits one is pending. If they allow this kind of crap to move ahead, there is no point in having an appellate system.

(5) I think there is a real chance that someone in my family - perhaps the lawyer -- was trying to have us killed that day. It's interesting that David Shuler's deputy buddy, Scott Harrison, was the one with an assault weapon pointed at my head.

legalschnauzer said...

@9:50 --

What criticisms do you have of Carol's conduct? Let's hear them. And since you entered her name into the equation, let's have your name and contact information. Then, we will be happy to hear your "criticisms," as if you have a clue what you are talking about.

Anonymous said...

@9:50 won't respond. Book it.

He's a puss and a dumb shut.

Anonymous said...

The judge must have an extra large fund for Chapstick purchases, so he can continue to kiss cops and prosecutors on the ass.

Anonymous said...

"If Harmison isn't smart enough to figure that out, he has no business being on the bench." Harmison is just a gofer for the criminals pulling the puppet-strings of all the bad actors in this situation.

Steve said...

It looks like Harrison has all but guaranteed you will succeed with Carol's appeal. But even before tha,t if he has not specified the offence that he found Carol guilty of how can he possibly pass any sentence?
He has also all but guaranteed that you will win your case against Lowther and Cowherd for fraud and false eviction. Then you will have the funds to go for the Greene County Sheriff!

legalschnauzer said...


You are absolutely correct, if the the rule of law still means anything in the US of A. The problem is finding a judge who will apply the rule of law. Carol and I have been waiting on that for 18 years -- in two states, through state courts and federal.

In fact, if Judge Harmison has even the slightest hint of integrity, he will grant Carol's post-judgment motions next Tuesday, and we won't have to go through the appellate process. But Harmison was appointed by probably the most corrupt governor in the US -- Eric Greitens -- so who knows if he has even a minimal level of integrity.

Lots of amazing stuff about this clown car of a case, but perhaps most amazing is that the "victim," Officer Jeremy Lynn, admits -- in the judgment and in his written report -- that he caused contact with Carol, which means by law, she could not have assaulted him. Plus, evidence is clear on the front page of the judgment that the cops had no lawful grounds to be even be on our property, much less breaking into our home, pointing guns at us, arresting us (for nothing), and ultimately breaking Carol's arm.

Anonymous said...

Aboard the Eliza Battle the crew was watching the movie ,"The Four Musketeers". Ms Chapelle asked the Captain, that with the release of the IG's report, if the Captain still believed that Comey would be vindicated by future historians. The Captain replied ," Yes! But only concerning his conduct pertaining to the E-Mail investigation." The Captain added that the IG's Investigation provided a vital clue to the identity of the Blue-Shirt Thug. Ms Chapelle gasped and asked," Do you know his identity." The Captain replied that the resignation of Lisa Page was one clue and Roger and the Blue-Shirt Thug each gave a clue. The Captain continued that in a recent post Roger had said that the thug was physically fit, but the Blue-Shirt Thug gave himself away when he said, "You're Done!" Ms Chapelle whispered," Who is he?" The Captain whispered," He is the broth........."Sorry to interrupt you Captain,but the Russian ship Aurora is flashing signal lights." The Captain replied, "Thank you Bob Yancey." Ms Chapelle asked the Captain for his opinion of what they were signaling. The Captain replied that they were not signal lights, but were the Russians taking family pictures to "share" with the senators of the POW/MIA Committee. Ms Chapelle produced the picture of Comey with the Gnome and asked the Captain what Comey was trying to convey. The Captain replied that the Gnome appeared to be the Celtic God Dagda wearing a hat. Come is signaling that he is aboard the Hibernia because Dagda is the figurehead of the ship.

Anonymous said...

Another great episode from aboard the Eliza Battle.

I've got to know: Was the Captain about to say, "He is the broth-er? Does that mean Mr. Blue Shirt is "the brother" of someone -- someone connected to the IG report about Jim Comey and the resignation of Lisa Page?

This is better than Agatha Christie!

Anonymous said...

Sounds like the Captain believes "Blue Shirt" is connected to the FBI.

Anonymous said...

The "Gnome" must be Jeff Sessions. What a great description! That's better than the "Elf."

e.a.f. said...

And this wonderful brand of "justice" is now being played out all over the U.S.A. with ICE. None of this should surprise any one. its what happens in dictatorships when people oppose the powerful.

I'd suggest it a very good thing that there is nothing about Carol and Roger which could bring them to the attention of ICE. Doesn't mean an other arm of the government isn't going to fxxk with them, but the U.S.A. is turning into a nice Nazi state. Too bad it used to be a pretty good country.

Anonymous said...

Come on You Guys! The Four Musketeers is a clue also.

Anonymous said...

Let me guess, BST (Blue Shirt Thug) is Keith Baker's brother... lololol

legalschnauzer said...

@5:53 --

That's a pretty interesting guess. Does Keith Baker have a brother? If so, what does he do?