Article Image
News Link • Justice and Judges

AZ Judge says unlawful to ever resist cops in 1990

• Phoenix New Times
[page5] ....On Saturday, March 3, 1990, twelve jurors found Jerry and Darlene Span guilty of assaulting U.S. marshals and resisting arrest.

Incredibly, five jurors believed it was the marshals who attacked the Spans, but because of Judge Robert Broomfield's instructions to the jury, they felt they had no choice but to convict.

From the bench, Broomfield told the jurors: "Federal officers engaged in good faith and colorable performance of their duties may not be forcibly resisted even if the resister turns out to be correct, that the resisted action should not, in fact, have been taken. The statute requires him to submit peaceably and seek legal redress thereafter."
In other words, no matter what the marshals did, Judge Broomfield's reading of the law is that the Spans' duty was to submit like sheep. .... [it gets even better]

And in another article:

.... Jerry and Darlene Span were charged with resisting arrest. Two years later, when the case came to trial, the photographs and eyewitness testimony were enough to convince at least five members of the jury that it was the marshals--not the Spans--who were responsible for the violence.

But, the jurors said later in statements, the judge's instructions appeared to give them no choice but to convict Darlene and Jerry of resisting arrest.

Basically, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Broomfield told the jurors that as long as the Spans did anything to resist marshals who were performing their official duties, they had to be found guilty.

The instructions Broomfield gave the jury read, in part: "Federal officers engaged in good faith . . . performance of their duties may not be forcibly resisted, even if the resistor turns out to be correct that the resisted action should not, in fact, have been taken."

Because Darlene and Jerry did wriggle and try to get away from Dains and Grotewald after the marshals jumped them, jury members said that they believed the law compelled a guilty verdict. .....

3 Comments in Response to

Comment by Charles Goodson
Entered on:

As I see it, we need to ave another revolution. 

Comment by Stupid Amerkin
Entered on:


The power of the judge or prosecutor over the jury is in direct proportion to the jury’s ignorance.

Red Beckman

Comment by Powell Gammill
Entered on:

In case you are wondering whatever became of this evil motherfucking judge...he is still our lifetime anointed uberfuhrer.   Though in 2002, he was appointed to the federal court that overseas secret wiretap/sneak and peek/and secret warrant under the various Patriot Act laws.  A court that had only granted 3 such writs in its history coincidentally I'm sure began rubber stamping such requests from the FBI a soon as our hro of the state sat down.

Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network:

Attorney For Freedom