Cannibals of Freedom: Bigotry in Law Enforcement - by Daniel L. Price, Esq.

I previously wrote about law enforcement hiding evidence and committing fraud/perjury.  Now I will share information about two cases, one without a victim, the other with a victim.   

The first case: People v. John Moyer, case #’s 16-004913-FY, and 16-004972-FY, in Berrien County.  The Berrien County Sheriff Dept., (yes, the same dept., where deputies commit perjury when writing speeding tickets), had surveillance set up on Moyer, a medical marijuana caregiver.  After deputies observed a person go in and out of Moyer’s home, they followed him (Moyer’s friend who recently had back surgery), and pulled him over for failing to use his turn signal.  They found marijuana, and determined he did not possess a medical marijuana card.  The man confessed he bought it from Moyer.   Deputies then executed a raid on Moyer’s home, took his plants, marijuana and any cash.  Moyer was charged with several felonies, including manufacturing and distributing marijuana, as
well as resisting arrest.

The second case: People v. Lisa Blanchard, case # HU-17-075942-SM, in Ottawa County.  Blanchard had been having sex on and off for a couple of months with a man who repeatedly told her he did not want to see her, because she badgered and threatened him in to continuing to have sex with her, even while she was seeing other men.  Indeed, she was texting him in excess of 1,500 times per month.  Blanchard was on a date with another man that apparently went bad one Friday evening in September. She then drove while intoxicated to the first man’s home offering food and sex, after he had said no earlier that day. He asked Blanchard to leave, and said she was neither invited nor welcome.  Blanchard still illegally entered his home stating he could not keep her from doing so.  He talked her out of his home, locked the door and refused her re-entry.  Blanchard became enraged and attempted to pry windows off the hinges so she could get in to physically attack the man, as she had previously attempted to scar him so that, “no woman will want to date” him.  Ultimately Blanchard damaged the home and other property in excess of $2,000.00, which is chargeable as a felony, before she finally left.

The next day the man called the Ottawa County Sheriff’s Dept., to report the incident. The deputy who called back refused to come to the home and take a report because he was investigating a possible drunk driver who had left his/her vehicle.  Ultimately, the deputy wrote the man’s complaint as a disturbing the peace case.  The man then had to go to the sheriff’s dept., and file a lengthy, detailed report of the incident with pictures of the damages.  The man did get a PPO, but it was reduced to a period of 6 months, rather than the statutory 1 year.  Blanchard was also criminally charged, but with only misdemeanors. 

In State v. Moyer, after a full pre-sentence investigation and recommendation from the probation department, Moyer received a 90 day jail sentence, with 30 days served, 60 days on tether, and 1 year of probation.  His total costs, fines and fees were approximately $2,500.00, not including the $1,260.00 the jail billed him for the pleasure of being caged for exercising his freedom, not harming a single person or anyone’s property. 

While in Blanchard’s case, no pre-sentence investigation took place, and the probation department did not receive the victim’s impact statement from the prosecutor.  However, a notation in the court file mentioned: “quickie sentencing”, full restitution, a $500.00 fine, and no probation recommendation.  Ultimately, the victim filed a victim’s impact statement supplement with the court, provided a copy to the judge, and attended Blanchard’s sentencing.  Blanchard had to pay full restitution, but received only 9 months’ probation, and was fined approximately $1,000.00, when it could have been thousands more. 

Similarities between Moyer and Blanchard: For both it was a first offense; and both are educated
professionals.  Differences between Moyer and Blanchard:  Moyer is a man, Blanchard a woman; Marijuana was involved in Moyer’s case, but not with Blanchard; Moyer caused no harm to anyone’s life, liberty, or property, Blanchard terrorized and attempted to harm a man, violated his home and freedom, and caused extensive property damage.

Merriam Webster’s dictionary defines bigotry as an, “obstinate or intolerant devotion to one's own opinions and prejudices”.  I cannot state with certainty that bigotry caused the differences in the severely disproportionate outcome in these cases.  But, I can state with certainty that Moyer’s actions did not violate the principles of freedom (Life, Liberty and Happiness), nor was there a victim.  In short, he was victimized for exercising freedom.  While, Blanchard’s crime did violate the principles of freedom that harmed a victim.  In short, she was destroying the freedom of another.  Yet Blanchard received penalties and suffered far less than Moyer. WHY?

Till next month, as always, keep rolling on.

Disclaimer:  This is an informational article only.  It is not to provide individual legal advice.  If you need legal services, feel free to contact me, or any attorney of your choosing.