Jury voir dire in the trial of citizen journalist Nydia Tisdale in Dawsonville, Dawson County, Georgia on Monday, November 27, 2017.
Video by James Dunn, Maverick Productions and edited by Nydia Tisdale, AboutForsyth.com.
Jury voir dire in the trial of citizen journalist Nydia Tisdale in Dawsonville, Dawson County, Georgia on Monday, November 27, 2017.
Video by James Dunn, Maverick Productions and edited by Nydia Tisdale, AboutForsyth.com.
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings
Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.
To use social login you have to agree with the storage and handling of your data by this website.
AcceptHere you'll find all collections you've created before.
Good luck.
All the best to you Nydia.
Peace, POETIC.
We should all get digital copies of this and store it on our own servers with a Blockchain attached. Obviously 6 hours is a lot of storage. But, it isn’t that much. The fact that this trial is public record is important. They may. be able to physically prevent us from recording reality. But, I don’t think they can stop us from digital recording and distribution because the network is too “distributed.” An important technological tipping point is the “Blockchain.”
Interesting discussion from the Judge at around 13 min about how the Jurors should, can, must, use information. This is important since a Trial is all about information, Nydia’s recording of reality. The Judge says, at 14 min jurors should not use ‘judgement.'” Interesting. This is in the context of Religious, moral, or philosophical beliefs that would prevent honest “judgement.” I think the word, “Judgement” as in “Sitting in Judgement” has a religious bias to it. I don’t really understand that, but I think it makes sense.
I found this from a friend of mine. Very good reading. http://politicalvine.com/politicalrumors/law-and-justice/the-railroading-of-nydia-tisdale-by-dawson-county/
This case was really about conspiracy & cover up at the highest levels of our county govt.
Doug, yes, I agree. Conspiracy and Cover up. That is why Nydia’s work is so important. “Transparency” to the source of the information is critical to valuing that information. They may try to cover up reality, but they will fail because information in the 21st Century is too distributed.
In the 21st Century we have this thing called the “Internet.” The Internet is based on distributed processing. We leave digital breadcrumbs all over the place today. We are building all kinds of digital “Blockchains.” (Blockchains are the new process that tracks transactions from the source.)
May I rewrite your sentence. I would say it this way. This case is really about “Information” and the efforts of Conservatives Republicans to control it.
The conspiracy and cover up is: 1) a conspiracy to limit information delivered to the residents of Dawson County in specific, and Georgia in general, and 2) the cover-up is refusing to acknowledge that is what the intent is. And try to spin it as a “Property Rights” issue. Not a “Free Press” issue.
The arguments put forth by the Jurors in this video was that this is about Property Rights. To me this is not about Property Rights, in the same way Slavery was. not about State’s Rights.
This actually plays into the discussion on Net Neutrality. In terms of the question: Who controls the flow of information in the Community?
Georgia and Dawson County Conservatives are now on record as saying they want to, and can, control information. (note: this is nothing new for them. They are on record many times saying they want to control information – just look at their attacks on Education and Science.)
Fortunately they are on the losing side of this discussion. History is moving away from this 1st Century World View more and more each day.
Unfortunately, however, they can do a lot damage if they want in time they are still in control of the State and Local Governments.
Does any of this make sense? It’s early and I am just putting down some thoughts.
Doug, very interesting you think the word “common sense” should be stricken. I agree everyone’s “common sense” is different. For reasons of biology and environment (nature & nurture).
May I ask, isn’t the intent of a trial to look for “Common Sense.” If a jury trial is not looking for common sense, what are they looking for?
Here is my thinking on this, for what it is worth. Today 100% of Doctors agree washing your hands is a good thing. Before Ignaz Semmelweis in the early 1800’s, that wasn’t “common sense.” But, once we proved it, it became Common Sense.
Wouldn’t you say, in general, and on average, reasonable people could agree on facts? They may disagree on the conclusions reached from those facts, but, reasonable people should be able to agree on some, if not most, facts. If a fact is defined as an externally observable event. Then reasonable people can agree they all saw this observable event. For example reading a thermometer in the court room. If you show a jury a thermometer they could agree it is a fact the thermometer says a certain temperature. They could disagree on the conclusion from that fact. I might conclude it is cold and you might conclude it is warm. Reasonable people could disagree on conclusions from facts, but reasonable people should be able to agree on facts.
Did I miss your point?
Did you check out the Defense Attorney’s Hair? A pony tail. You got to love the optics of it.
Check out his record. Bruce Harvey.
Jury Selection starts about 1:02. And then after the break 1:37
At 1:10 the key charge in the Indictment – The Police were following “Lawful” discharge of their duties. So this case should be about finding evidence either, For or Against, that the Police were following the “lawful” discharge of their duties.
The Guilty Verdict means that, apparently in Georgia, 12 citizens think anything the State wants to do is “Lawful.”
This all comes down to whether or not the property owners had the authority to stop her from recording and trespass her from the property. Because the event was advertised to the general public for all to attend and no restrictions were posted at all regarding who could attend or record the event means the public’s first amendment rights are in full effect even on the private property in which the event was held. Now had the property owners acquired a permit for their event, charged an entry free, used ticketing for entry, or posted at the event site or in the public invitations to attend the event certain restrictions then they could have restricted recording by the media, barred entry or trespassed whomever they wanted and for any reason. Without any of these in place, the only way she could be legally trespassed is if she was breaking the law and committing a crime like disturbing the peace. They also did not tell the known media person behind Tysdale who was using a camera the entire time to also stop recording the event , which means they were not attempting to equally apply their alleged policy to everyone, which further weakens their argument should they say that no recording was to be allowed at all. Tysdale also states that the wife property owner initially gave her support for Tysdale recording the event, not that it was legally needed in this instance, further supports Tysdale’s activities. And even the group chairperson remarked that the way Tysdale was being treated was wrong and apologized to her as Tysdale was being manhandled by the officer…that right there is an admission of civil liability.
Inquisitor, excellent addition to the discussion. Thank you. I agree with your conclusions.
For me, the point is about information in the 21st Century and the power of the State, via the Police, to control information.
The sad part is that the information Nydia was recording was not really that new, unique, or special. The comments they, the GOP Speakers, were making are pretty much the same as they always make.
Yet the GOP, fueled by their Alt-Right tribe, felt it important to try and stop Nydia from recording reality. The sad part is there are significant elements within the Alt-Right wing of the GOP that believe they can control information. The sadder part is that 12 residents of Dawson County agree.
This is similar to what went on in the 1500’s with the printing press. The Catholic Church tried to control information. Calvin and Luther would have nothing to do with it.
I concur with inquisitor’s excellent summary.
At 1:45 a Juror says that he cannot be fair because he supports “Private Property Rights.” Isn’t that interesting. I guess he is saying he believes “Private Property Rights” trump (pun intended) the Constitutional Right to gather information in a “Public” event. And I guess he is saying that he expects the State to empower the Police to enforce his personal “Private Property Rights” independent of the US Constitution. And interestingly, he was stricken for “Cause.” The Prosecution argued he should not be stricken from Cause. I agree with the Judge in this case.
Smith vs Cumming 2000.
I’m seriously considering changing my online name to “pun intended” just because of you.
praying for Justice to be done……
Can’t believe they’ve let this go so far. Most jurisdictions would have done damage control a long time ago. Now Joeja justice is on display for the world to see. Somebody screwed up big time. At this point, it will be a win for Tisdale and personal liberty no matter what they do.
Well said.
Nydia I hope you appeal the obstruction conviction as I believe it is a travesty of justice.
There cannot be an obstruction charge without a crime for Capt. Wooten to even lay a hand on Ms. Tisdale. The jury found her Not Guilty of criminal trespass.
Please keep in mind Capt Tony Wooten at the time was running for sheriff & he said in an email to Clint Bearden that he was going to attend anyway. Tony Wooten said he was on duty that day but the public records I obtained for that day show he was not being paid by the county but being on “extra duty” for that day. If he was on duty like he said he was on the stand, why did he not have handcuffs & an official car?