Sheriff Wayne Ivey is responsible for the actions of his deputies as their superior. However, he is first and foremost responsible for upholding the constitution as sworn by his oath of office. Has Wayne Ivey ignored the constitution and implemented his own version of a dictatorship? Let us examine some key notes this 2nd day of November in the year 2013.
'Brevard County Sheriff’s Office is reviewing the arrest of a man who was handcuffed after he filmed a deputy making a traffic stop. Jeffrey Marcus Gray, 43, told FLORIDA TODAY he works for Photography is Not a Crime, a blog that focuses on recording police activity. He and his attorney consider the arrest wrongful.' - Florida Today October 31, 2013
We all remember the declaration of independence don't we? 'He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.' -In Congress, July 4, 1776. When coupled with the first amendment, we can see why those words were so important; Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
In the video the officer states to Jeffrey's wife: 'who are you' and she identifies herself as Jeffrey Gray's wife. The officer then threatens Jeffrey Gray's wife with: 'you better get that camera out of my face'. The officer then refuses to tell Jeffrey's wife where she can find BCSO, (Brevard County Sherff's Office) and claims because she was uncooperative. She identified herself and she did not have the camera in his face so how was she uncooperative and in what country does a sheriff deputy refuse to tell you where the jail is? Is it a private jail the public doesn't need to know about unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature?
What is representation in the legislature? Well for those of you who know but don't quite know what a law is here is why the first amendment is so important. A law is not a law at all it is a code or statute it is adopted by the Law (constitution) to govern and insure peace and tranquility among the citizens. A law or actually code or statute is not permanent it is adopted for a period of time such as a trial period while put in place that has to be renewed when its period is up. So when that statute as it is in Florida has run out of time the legislature reviews it based on its performance and effectiveness and decides on whether to amend it, abolish it or extend its time. Representation can not be found if the people are uninformed to report back to their representative after all no one is a mind reader. So the first amendment protects the right of the people to assemble, disseminate and discuss the performance of those laws, codes and statutes and the performance of those elected to uphold them and their performance in public.
Are we to believe in a country that demands sworn testimony that citizens cannot watch, record and disperse information about those holding an office of public trust? Are the sheriff and his deputies above the law? It is rumored Jeffrey made public record requests. Was this done in retaliation? Is it the sheriff's will to allow his officers to act as tyrants over the county of Brevard?
Although the office of sheriff in Brevard County might have changed hands, what about those in office just under the sheriff? Some of which have been there for some time and obviously would have stronger connections than the sheriff within their own private community of buddies. For instance should people be taking a closer look at Jimmy Donn?
Jimmy Donn previously stated in a phone conversation he worked in the internal affairs office at Brevard County Sheriff's Department while also handling the Brevard County Sheriff Department's legal affairs. Just how much does the local sheriff department have to hide when they are 'nervous' about a traffic stop being recorded. Which raises questions about why they have no problem with big corporate media recording but frown upon citizens recording them. After all Jeffrey did say his wife would move the car how was that uncooperative? Guess he wasn't on the Wayne Ivey's top 10 public relations list for disseminating his vision or opinion.
Which leaves us with: Freedom of thought - human right - (law) any basic right or freedom to which all human beings are entitled and in whose exercise a government may not interfere (including rights to life and liberty as well as freedom of thought and expression and equality before the law). We can see why those words were so important; Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Freedom of thought... is the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom. With rare aberrations a pervasive recognition of this truth can be traced in our history, political and legal. Such ideas are also a vital part of international human rights law. In the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which is legally binding on member states of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, freedom of thought is listed under Article 18:
'Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.'
During our nation's early era, the courts were almost universally hostile to political minorities' First Amendment rights; free speech issues did not even reach the Supreme Court until 1919 when, in Schenck v. U.S. , the Court unanimously upheld the conviction of a Socialist Party member for mailing anti-anti-war leaflets to draft-age men. A turning point occurred a few months later in Abrams v. U.S. Although the defendant's conviction under the Espionage Act for distributing anti-war leaflets was upheld, two dissenting opinions formed the cornerstone of our modern First Amendment law. Justices Oliver Wendell Holmes and Louis D. Brandeis argued speech could only be punished if it presented 'a clear and present danger' of imminent harm. Mere political advocacy, they said, was protected by the First Amendment. Eventually, these justices were able to convince a majority of the Court to adopt the 'clear and present danger test.'
I don't believe the officer was in imminent danger from a cellphone especially after being told that Jeffrey was merely recording the traffic stop. Maybe Jeffrey should look into the monopoly aspect for his defense after all if citizens receive this kind of treatment for freedom of press wouldn't that create a monopoly for the corporate media? Is every public act recorded only approved by the Sheriff Department if its planned, choreographed and scripted? Has Brevard County become lawless America under a dictatorship of Wayne Ivey? Explore your Brevard with a closer look today.