State of Kansas Federal Prosecutors Motion to revoke Bond is Vindictive

Get free hit counter code here.

According to the motion filed by U.S. prosecuting Attorney Marietta Parker, The State of Kansas has its own set Federal laws that define a crime punishable by a "revoke of bond" and Federal Prison time.

The motion below contends that the defendants Guy and Carrie Neighbors need to have their bond revoked and thrown in Federal prison, not for committing a crime, but rather because they dare to publicly (through the internet) hold the Government (Both law enforcement and Prosecutors) accountable for their actions.

During a hearing on Tuesday May 6th, 2008, in Federal Court, when the defense attorney stated that a motion would be filed to obtain the Police officers personel files as part of the discovery to show that the defendants are not committing slander with their allegations, the Prosecutor U.S. Assistant Attorney Scott Rask who replaced Marietta Parker {because she was unavailable for the hearing} objected and told the Judge that quote "the defendants should not get any discovery and they should just be thrown in Jail!"

But wait if its true then its not slander!

According to the motion, it is a Federal offense punishable by imprisonment for a defendant to e-mail information as it is posted on a blog site as part of the evidence to an investigator of the case...ie-Postal Inspector Agent David E Nitz.

It is also a Federal offense punishable by imprisonment (according to the motion} for a defendant who is a delivery driver, to happen to drive on a public street that happens to go past a police officers house.

according to the motion, it is a Federal offense, and the defendants need to go to Federal Prison for blogging the fact that people who lie in Federal court can be charged with perjury!
Could this have caused witnesses who had planned on telling lies during the trial to have second thoughts? Could officers who had planned to testify be having second thoughts because they fear civil litigation or extended sentences for perjury?
Why would these witnesses (according to the motion) fear these things if they were telling the truth and had sufficient evidence to back up what they plan to testify about? How can this be considered tampering with a witness?

According to the motion to revoke the bond, it is also a Federal offense for a defendant to post on the internet the facts pointing out that the police investigating the case have planted evidence, violated chain of custody laws, violated the defendants constitutional rights and the prosecutor has knowingly obstructed justice!

According to the motion, an African American defendant who asks the public to call or write their Government officials or boss'es and ask them to explain "why this vindictive case has not been dropped, or why these defendants continue to be racially profiled!" Should have his bond revoked and he and his wife should go straight to Federal prison. Because the Government does not need to answer to; or have the oversight of the public.