On the other side of the coin is the case of Darlene Span...
Darlene Span related that two federal marshals came to her home while she was having a yard sale. They had no uniform. She described their attire as "wrinkled up shabby street wear." They wore cowboy boots, and had no badges to indicate that they were government personnel. She said that "they were sweaty, they were rude, and they were cocky." They showed her a picture of a man that was wanted by the federal government, and named the man. They were looking for a Mickey Michael, whose name was similar to the name of Darlene's brother, who was Mike Michael. She said "The person they were looking for lived in Indiana, and we lived in Phoenix all our life." She also noted that there was about a twenty-five year difference in their ages. She explained that she, and her brother Jerry, who was helping with the yard sale, tried to be helpful with the marshals, attempting to explain the discrepancies in the descriptions of the two men. The man that they were looking for had "jumped bail" on a robbery charge twelve years earlier. She said that the marshals then went "out of control", and demanded that she would have to get her brother there, right now, or she "would be sorry." She then demanded that the marshals leave the property. They would not leave. The marshals then began to manhandle Darlene and her brother Jerry, handcuffing them. Her Mother, who was also helping with the yard sale, picked up a camera and started taking photos of the scene. The marshals manhandled the woman and took her film from her. Darlene and her brother, Jerry, were taken to a local jail and were incarcerated for three days. They were later released. A year and eight months later, charges were brought against them of resisting and obstructing the officers in the performance of their duty. The government had suppressed the testimony of some of the witnesses present at the yard sale before the Grand Jury relating to these charges. Darlene and her brother found five other federal marshals who would testify at the trial that the two marshals, David A. Danes, and Gary T. Grotewald, were under internal affairs investigation for their behavior in other incidents. A marshal, Thomas Lopez, had written a letter to the federal prosecutor in this case, Ivan Mathew, relating his "personal knowledge" that the two marshals "have a reputation for provoking assault." The prosecutor took Darlene and her brother into a room and told them that if they put the testimony of these marshals into evidence, charges would be filed against other of their family members. One marshal who went to the prosecutor and was willing to testify against Dane and Grotewald was told that he "better go home and think twice before he lets anybody know that Grotewald and Danes beat up the Span family."
Darlene learned from some of the jurors, who waited for them after the trial to talk with them, that during the trial, they realized that the testimony of David Danes, and Gary Grotewald, "was rehearsed", and that they believed the testimony of witnesses, who were present at the garage sale during the incident, and that Darlene and her brother were innocent of the charges brought against them. They felt intimidated by the prosecutor, and the judge, Robert C. Broomfield, of the federal District Court, one declaring that she felt that she would be put in jail if she did not write "guilty" on the paper. The jurors, some in tears, believing that Darlene Span and her brother were innocent of the charges, declared them guilty. Darlene explained that some of the jurors called, even months later, saying that they were ill over having to find her guilty, knowing that she was innocent. One juror, Sally Osborne, speaking on a radio talk show of the incident, declared that the Span family had been "victimized".
Yes, Darlene Span was victimized. She was victimized by the jury. They broke the faith with one of the most portentous of the laws of God:
You shall not pervert justice, either by favouring the poor or by subservience to the great. You shall judge your fellow countryman with strict justice. — Leviticus 19 v 15
Alan Dershowitz, a professor from the Harvard University, took up the appeal for Darlene Span and her brother, finding over twenty appealable issues for review by the federal Court of Appeals; but even he could not undo the damage that the jury had done. The appeal failed to exonerate the Span family. Darlene and her family have lost their home because of the expenses of their ordeal with the Federales.
Doing what is right is a matter of character. The jury knew very well the right thing to do and didn't do it. But, that's what happens when you have a toady people, and a government on the take.
STORY1STORY2STORY3STORY4
