Live Traffic Feed

Feedjit Widget

Julian Heicklen On Trial

International Libertarian Julian Heicklen, long time advocate for the Fully Informed Jury Association, has recently been indicted on charges of jury tampering. Obviously he will fight the obscene charges. However, it is worth noting that this action has brought us to a very defining moment in history.

Over the course of the years, we have seen our freedoms disappear one by one. The Constitution is being shoved under the rug and completely disregarded by all branches of government. The very last vestige of hope between a tyrannical government and the citizens is the jury that can put the law itself on trial.

Although Julian is representing himself, pro se, he none-the-less is making arguing the point of the jury and its duty within the system. If he looses this case, juries are nothing more then mere puppets of the judges. You may as well not have any at all.

When juries are no longer free to do their job we have crossed over into the realm of compete tyrannical power. I fear for this time we are about to enter. The end of our country as we know it may soon be at our doorstep. Often we have cried for people to hold their government accountable. If he looses, holding them accountable may no longer be sufficient.

I received the below information in an email from a friend and thought you might want to see it so that you know what is going on. If you are inclined, contact Julian and give him your support. I am sure he would like to know that others out there back his stance and what he is doing.

Yours In Liberty

<------------------ received email starts here ------------------------------->

Hi Tyranny Fighters:


On January 11, 2011, I was notified by summons that I have been criminally charged with jury tampering. The moment of truth has arrived. My response to the court is given at the end of this E-mail. The dance begins. Finally we will have the opportunity to inform the jury in the U. S. District Court: Southern District of New York that the judges have routinely lied to it.

This trial could be the defining trial of the decade. We must not blow it. I will represent myself as counsel pro se. However, I am asking all the attorneys and others knowledgable in the law on the Tyranny Fighters mailing list receiving this E-mail to join as co-counsels. Particularly, I hope that the American Jury Institute/Fully Informed Jury Association and the American Civil Liberties Union join me to provide advice, guidance and strategy.

I maintain the role as lead counsel, because I can and will say and do things that could disbar any attorney.

In addition, I request that all of you that write for news outlets, have radio shows, and/or blogs will publicize this trial to the hilt. I intend to provide a blow by blow flow of trial information. Be sure to send your material to major news outlets. The rest of you can write letters-to-the editor of your local newspapers and magazines with trial information as it becomes available.

I want this to be the ultimate public trial.

2. LWRN Radio Broadcasts at
December 18, 2010
James Cox, FIJA Coordinator for southern Florida tolded the upcoming TSA more about the FIJA outreach in southern Florida
James Babb discussed the TSA Body Scanner Protest at U. S. Airports, December 23, 2010

December 25, 2010
Michael Benoit: LP candidate for US Congress in California’s 52nd District, 2010, discussed the U. S. income tax laws.

January 1, 2011
John Kurtz discussed his CopBlock adventures. I gave a year-end review of activities.

January 8, 2011
Julian discussed the recent anti-TSA outreach with Jim Babb, Nick Hankoff and Scott Olver.
January 15, 2011
John Kotmair will discuss the income tax.

Please visit to learn more about Liberty Works Radio Network’s plan for spreading the message of limited government and individual liberty all across the country, and then help us by becoming a member of the LWRN Fellowship.

3. Future Activities
a. James Cox is traveling around Florida organizing and stimulating freedom groups (see letter below).
b. James Cox and I are planning on spreading the message all around the country, if we can raise the money to support us (see letter below).

4. The Non-Trials
A new book by Julian Heicklen discusses his arrest at the Isaiah Wall in Manhattan, NY, in 2007 and the subsequent legal activity. It has been completed and sent to the publisher. It should be available for purchase next week at bookstores. I am planning on a book tour for 2011 and am available for book sales and/or speeches at any conventions. Let me know if your organization is interested.

5. Suggested Books
Michael Badnarik gives a course about the U. S. Constitution using his book “Good to be King.”

Mike Benoit has written a book entitled “Sham and Shame of the Federal Income Tax.” You can purchase it directly from him for five dollars. He will send you a pdf free. His E-mail address is in the header of this E-mail.

6. Warning
You should know that the Federal Protective Service, and possibly the FBI, is intercepting my E-mails. Another violation of our civil liberties. Be prudent if you write to me. However a U. S. court recently has ruled that If the government wants to see your emails stored by an Internet service provider, they first will have to get a warrant. See:



Yours in freedom—Julian

734 Rutland Avenue
Teaneck, NJ 07666

January 13, 2011

Pro Se Clerk
Room 230
U. S. District Court
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, NY 10007

Re: United States v. Julian Heicklen, Cr. 1154

Dear Clerk:

On January 11, 2011, at 1:25 pm, I was served with a summons by Officer Martinez and 2 other unidentified Federal Protection Service Officers to appear for a hearing on January 24, 2011, at 10:00 am in Courtroom 15B. This is less than the 20 days usually allowed by this Court. Furthermore a summons should be served by federal marshals, not law enforcement officers. Additionally there are other problems:

1. Was I indicted by a Grand Jury? If not the indictment is not valid. See U. S. Constitution, Amendment V and J. Heicklen “The Non-Trials,” Ch. IV (2011); just published.

2. If I was indicted, I was not informed of any hearing, and thus was denied the opportunity to testify before the Grand Jury. That makes any indictment invalid, as I am entitled to present my information to the Grand Jury as given by FRCrP Rules 7 and 58(b)(1):

Rule 7. The Indictment and the Information
(a) When Used. (1) Felony. An offense (other than criminal contempt) must
be prosecuted by an indictment if it is punishable: (A) by death; or (B)by imprisonment for more than one year.

(2) Misdemeanor. An offense punishable by imprisonment for one year or less may be prosecuted in accordance with Rule

58 (b) Pretrial Procedure. (1) Charging Document. The trial of a misdemeanor may proceed on an indictment, information, or complaint. The trial of a petty offense may also proceed on a citation or violation notice.

3. The arraignment was not done in open court in the presence of the defendant, in conflict with FRCrP Rule 10.

Rule 10. Arraignment
(a) In General. An arraignment must be conducted in open court and must consist of:
(1) ensuring that the defendant has a copy of the indictment or information;
(2) reading the indictment or information to the defendant or stating to the defendant the substance of the charge; and then
(3) asking the defendant to plead to the indictment or information.

4. In addition to those technicalities, the summons does not include any deposition from the accuser, so that I do not know the specific incident that is involved. The summons states that there is only one charge, but gives no particulars, including a date, time, location of the incident, names & dates of jurors tampered, & how tampered. This is a violation of FRCrP Rule 3.

Rule 3. The Complaint
The complaint is a written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged. It must be made under oath before a magistrate judge or, if none is reasonably available, before a state or local judicial officer.

5. It also is a violation of the U. S. Constitution, Amendment VI, which requires that the accused “be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation.” It also violates FRCrP Rules 43 and 44.

Rule 43. Defendant’s Presence
(a) When Required. Unless this rule, Rule 5, or Rule 10 provides otherwise, the defendant must be present at: the initial appearance, the initial arraignment, and the plea; and

Rule 44.
(2) every trial stage, including jury impanelment and the re- turn of the verdict; and (3) sentencing

6. Since I am being charged with a criminal offense, I am entitled to a jury trial as required by the U. S. Constitution, Amendment VI. I will need such a commitment in writing from the trial judge before proceding further.

7. Before I appear for a hearing, I must be notified of what will transpire at the hearing, so I can prepare appropriately to respond and defend myself, as required by Rule 4.

Rule 4. Arrest Warrant or Summons on a Complaint
(1) Warrant. A warrant must:
(A) contain the defendant’s name or, if it is unknown, a name or description by which the defendant can be identified with reasonable certainty;
(B) describe the offense charged in the complaint;
(C) command that the defendant be arrested and brought without unnecessary delay before a magistrate judge or,
if none is reasonably available, before a state or local judicial officer; and
(D) be signed by a judge.
(2) Summons. A summons must be in the same form as a warrant except that it must require the defendant to appear before a magistrate judge at a stated time and place.Finally Judge Wood threatened me against using my legal right in another case #08 CV 02457, and she recused herself upon my request. She cannot conduct an impartial trial and must be recused from this case.

8. Finally Judge Wood threatened me against using my legal right in another case #08 CV 02457, and she recused herself upon my request. She cannot conduct an impartial trial and must be recused from this case.

I thank the Court for the opportunity to discuss jury nullification in front of a jury in this court. I look forward to the experience.

Sincerely yours,

Julian Heicklen
Counsel Pro Se

CC: Rebecca Mermelstein, Assistant U. S. Attorney, S. D. N. Y., U. S. Courthouse, 300 Quarropas Street, White Plains, NY 10601

2 comments to Julian Heicklen On Trial

  • “If the judge can legislate from the bench, than why can’t a juror legislate from the juror box?” Right, JimK?

  • They can – when a juror is in that box – the law itself is on trial. Try getting a judge to tell that truth to a jury. Fat chance – LOL.