How is this constitutional?
Columbus judge is adding a new term to defendants’ probation: Get your COVID shot
A Franklin County judge recently began including vaccination against COVID-19 as a condition of defendants’ terms of probation.
Common Pleas Judge Richard Frye said last week he added the vaccine as a condition on three cases in the week of the roughly 20 sentences he imposed.
He said he discussed the matter in open court with the defendants, and they attributed their unvaccinated status to procrastination. None raised any philosophical, medical or religious objection.
“It occurred to me that at least some of these folks need to be encouraged not to procrastinate,” Frye said in an interview. “I think it’s a reasonable condition when we’re telling people to get employed and be out in the community.”
He declined to “speculate” what would happen if a defendant raised a medical, religious or philosophical exemption to vaccination, but said this is a different situation entirely than people who have simply put the matter off.
An example: a man named Cameron Stringer entered a guilty plea for one charge of improperly handling firearms in a motor vehicle, for which he was sentenced to two years of probation (“community control,” as it’s known in Ohio).
Stringer must submit to random drug screening; avoid further legal trouble; return a firearm in question to its rightful owner; and obtain a COVID-19 vaccine within 30 days and provide proof to the Probation Department, court documents show.
It’s unclear how widespread this judicial practice is. Frye said he didn’t know if any other judges were doing anything similar. A spokesman for the Supreme Court, which oversees lower courts, said he didn’t know of any judges doing anything similar. However, he sent a link to a media report about a judge offering to shorten probation stretches for those who obtain a vaccine.
Ah, that is legal how?
It is not legal.
I hereby sentence you to experimental gene therapy.
Wouldn’t this fall under “cruel and unusual punishment”?
Well, technically the judge is not sentencing.
He is offering a deal to keep you out of jail. You don’t have to accept.
But I think it’s a weird one. That’s like saying you can stay out of jail if you denounce Islam.
Oh, HELL, no.
I’m not a lawyer, but in reading the court document it looks like the defendant pled to the charge, and then went straight to sentencing. At that point the judge pronounced that the Covid jab must take place within 30 days. Maybe the defendant pled to the charge knowing what the sentence would be. Since I haven’t seen the wrong side of the law I’m not an expert in these things.
Life imprisonment or death – – your choice.
Fight back! No way a judge or anyone else can force anything in to your body.
The brainwashing is astounding.
Plus the courts have no jurisdiction in health care decisions.
Hey, my sister has been she will lose her job Sept 1 if she doesn’t get vaxxed. So, if employers can force it on law abiding workers as a condition of employment, why can’t judges make it a condition of probation for criminals?
BTW: Sis and I don’t thing anyone should be able to force anyone to get the jab as a condition of anything. She’s talking to a lawyer and job hunting.
I would love to hear some news about workers fighting back and winning against these requirements…
Little Morphin’ Annie
Well if sis does get the Jab, which doesn’t sound like the jobs or the employer are worth it, and she gets the least little bit sick the employer is liable. If she gets really sick she can own the place.
Give ’em those lumpy Chinese vaccines…
I wonder if the judge has been “vaccinated” ?
Thanks, Brad.
She has put a letter in her personnel file, noting that if she does decide to get it, she will be doing so under duress, and that she will hold them liable for any ill effects, as she would only take it in order to keep her job.
Hoping one or more of the vaccines is recalled before Sept 1 and/or a lawsuit in a similar situation is successful and sets a precedent. But they’ll probably look for some other reason to let her go, now that they know she’s not a team player, or a liberal…
If you have a reaction to the vaccine can you sue the judge?
Damn commie bastard!
It would be a real shame if someone gave that judge a shot, if you know what I mean.
Good luck on getting the employer to admit anything concerning the chemistry experiment the feds are conducting.
OSHA said employers don’t have to acknowledge or report adverse reactions for at least a year.
“He declined to “speculate” what would happen if a defendant raised a medical, religious or philosophical exemption to vaccination, but said this is a different situation entirely than people who have simply put the matter off.”
I’m not seeing the difference. If getting the jab is not legally required, nobody should have to explain to a judge why they didn’t get it. Are they planning to make avoiding the jab a hate crime?
So every infraction comes with a death sentence?
Making what’s coming easier to do.