11/2/17~My probation violation hearing for “referencing the family” involved in my case no.19HA-CR-15-4227 started with another alleged probation violation for an unidentified post. Kathryn Keena, Assistant Dakota Co. Attorney, reported that it had just been brought to her attention that AM and requested a continuance to review the allegations.
She also indicated that the disposition of my alleged HRO violation should be determined prior to the probation violation hearing as it would essentially be double jeopardy as the charges are the same. Yes, it would and I brought that up at the HRO dismissal hearing with Judge Kanning on 9/29/17.
Five policy considerations underpin the double jeopardy doctrine: The Free Dictionary
(1) preventing the government from employing its superior resources to wear down and erroneously convict innocent persons;
(2) protecting individuals from the financial, emotional, and social consequences of successive prosecutions;
(3) preserving the finality & integrity of criminal proceedings, which would be compromised were the state allowed to arbitrarily ignore unsatisfactory outcomes;
(4) restricting prosecutorial discretion over the charging process; and
(5) eliminating judicial discretion to impose cumulative punishments that the legislature has not authorized.
I submitted an unconstitutionality challenge of the sentencing condition as written and applied, due to the presumptive protection of speech and because there is no compelling state interest to interfere with my first amendment rights. I have substantially complied with the requirements of the orders but, more importantly, I shouldn’t have conditions because I shouldn’t have been charged or convicted of parental deprivation in the first place.
The basis of the HRO and HRO violation is “blog” posting with no threatening statements listed, no acts of harassment cited, and no proof that any posts constitute harassment or threats as defined by law. Judge Asphaug has essentially created a situation where I can be violated for any “blog” and charge me with an HRO or probation violation; this is a clear abuse of judicial discretion.
Interestingly, Judge Karen Asphaug’s husband Attorney David Warg also observed my hearing yesterday.
David Warg, was once a partner in a law firm with Judge Tim Wermager. Judge Wermager was the first judge to preside over the divorce that initiated this case.
A news article on the swearing in of Tim Wermager suggests that a good ‘ole boys club exists in Dakota County. The article hints that Wermager became a judge because of his political connections and alludes to political alliance, and deals made on the golf course that influence the court system, and judiciary, in Dakota County. (2008) Wermager sworn in as judge
Attorney David Warg is also a public defender in Dakota County. Nepotism and cronyism definitely permeate the system, so any chance of a fair trial are slim to none unless you’re on the favored side. That I am definitely not!
So, the result of the 4 hearings I have attended since September have led to continuances and more hearings. My probation violation contested hearing is continued to March 7, 2018.
The documents below show that for the charge of “blogging”, I have a total of 7 hearings spread out from September 2017 to March 2018. This seems like relentless targeting to intimidate and bully me into submission but I’ll let readers decide that for themselves.