Sam Redman's Musings

Random thoughts on a variety of subjects

Deprivation of constitutional rights…

It seems apparent that the leaders at the strong city estate, with Wayne Bent’s son now obviously in charge, have conspired to deprive the girl Aquinnah O’Keefe (also known as Esther) of her rights under the constitution and the US code of law.

There may be sufficient facts now accumulated to provide convincing arguments to Federal Prosecutors, which would enable their office to present enough evidence to a Federal Grand Jury, which can result in the return of an indictment against Jeff Bent (and his gang of five or six, which includes the young woman’s mother). They would be indicted for the crimes of (1) Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights. (2) Conspiracy to deprive another of their civil rights , and (3) Actual depriving another person of their civil rights.

Jeff would be the primary target of the indictment, along with all of those in that room when the deputies were first there. We have the video of all of them using their authoritative powers to convince the young woman, Esther to engage and continue in a fast toward suicide. In addition, their admission that they worked together to author, then co-sign a document, designed to provide instructions to medical personnel “not to resuscitate” in the event of a comatose state, brought on by this fast and one which encourages her to continue her actions (at an advanced stage of the self-induced starvation, which readily available scientific information indicated would be at a danger point) when they had in their possession (and Jeff had posted on the internet) her own written stated objective of taking her own life (in describing her fast, she said, “I have taken his (Bent’s) sentence as my own death sentence…”) providing further convincing evidence of their purposeful conspiracy. They knew full well that it was a suicide fast and they did everything they could to put her into a position of being intimidated to continue. Such intimidation includes Jeff Bent’s publication of her promises (and their production of her statement on video) to take this until death, forcing her act of self-destruction into a difficult to retract matter of honor.

The constitution and laws of the United States grant to each citizen the right to life. If anyone conspires to injure or intimidate anyone else in the free exercise of that right they are guilty of conspiracy to deny another person of such constitutional and US code provisions. Oddly, so many times when writing about this case, the situation or circumstances posed has presented an irony and amazingly here is another. The irony here is that, while they seem to all be laboring under the notion that the state is now depriving Esther of her civil right of religious freedom, this group of six, led by Jeff Bent, are actually the ones who are conspiring to injure and intimidate her in an attempt to deprive her of her constitutional and US law right to life.

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241
Conspiracy Against Rights

This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).

Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death.

It is noteworthy that Section 241 does not require that any of the conspirators commit an overt act for the conspiracy to be a crime.

There is an odd parallel between the crimes which they attempt to justify under the constitutional right of “freedom of religion;” first, the sexual offenses, and now this crime which includes violation of the laws of “encouragement of suicide, as well as aiding and abetting in the commission of a suicide and the abrogation of responsibility to render aid and prevent self-injury” in that they have attempted to justify both crimes under the exact same umbrella. What they seem to fail to realize is that you cannot use “Freedom of Religion” to justify criminal activity. The saying that it is insane to repeat the same actions and expect different results (attributed, probably erroneously, to Einstein) seems to fit well here.

— Sam


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


This entry was posted on January 31, 2009 by and tagged , , , , , .