Molon Labe!

by Boston T. Party

  Day Two

  "Defense calls Mr. Harold Krassny to the stand," announces Juliette.

  Harold Krassny is a spry old man, his skin weathered from seven decades of ranching life. His eyes, however, twinkle with intelligence. He is sworn in and seated.

  "Mr. Krassny, are you familiar with State Exhibit A, the FAL rifle owned by Bill Russell?" asks Juliette.

  "Yes, ma'am, I am."

  "And how is that?"

  "It used to be mine. I bought it new last November."

  "What did you do with it?"

  "I shot it for a while and then traded it at Natrona Sports for a really nice target pistol," answers Krassny.

  "And when was that?"

  "March this year."

  "When you bought the rifle new did it have a muzzle brake on it?"

  "No, ma'am. I ordered that from an advertiser in The Shotgun News and installed it myself."

  "And when did you install the muzzle brake?"

  "December 1994."

  "Do you have a copy of the ad and receipt with you today?"

  "Yes, ma'am, I do."

  Turning to Judge Fleming, Juliette says, "Defense moves to enter the muzzle brake ad and receipt into evidence as Exhibits A and B." She hands them to the bailiff, who then shows them to Krempler.

  Fleming asks Krempler, "Does the State have any objection?" Frowning, Krempler replies, "No, Your Honor."

  "Very well. Mark the ad and receipt as Defense Exhibits A and B. Continue Miss Kramer."

  "Thank you, Your Honor. Mr. Krassny, why did you install a muzzle brake on your rifle?"

  "I was trying to reduce the recoil. I weigh only 155 pounds, but at 73 years of age I'm not the 155 pounds I used to be."

  The courtroom laughs at this.

  "Did the muzzle brake reduce the recoil?"

  "Yes, by about a third."

  "Did you leave the muzzle brake on the rifle when you traded it?"

  "Yes, ma'am."

  Juliette walks over with the FAL pointed towards the ceiling. "Is this muzzle brake on the rifle the same one you ordered and installed?"

  Krassny looks it over and nods confidently. "Yes, it is."

  "How can you be sure?"

  "Because I accidentally scratched it when I was installing it, and I touched it up with some cold blue. See there?"

  Krempler briskly stands and says, "Your Honor, I fail to see where this is going. The owner history of the muzzle attachment is irrelevant."

  Fleming slowly asks Juliette, "You are coming to a point, aren't you Miss Kramer?"

  "Certainly, Your Honor. Nearly there, in fact," Juliette smiles.

  "Very well. Continue. But do wrap it up." Imperious.

  "Yes, Your Honor. Mr. Krassny, would you please read the ad."

  "Surely. It reads 'FAL Muzzle Brake. Reduces muzzle climb and felt recoil. Blued steel. No gunsmithing required. Attaches with 4 set screws. ATF approved for post-ban rifles. $19.99.'"

  Juliette turns and impales Krempler with a glare as she confirms, "'ATF approved for post-ban rifles'? Is that right, Mr. Krassny?"

  "Yes, ma'am, that's what it reads."

  "Mr. Krassny, did you rely in good faith upon that assertion that the purchase and installation of this accessory was in full compliance of Title 18 United States Code, section 921?"

  "Why yes, ma'am! I didn't want to do anything illegal!"

  A few snickers are heard at the back of the room.

  Krempler sizzles, unsure if Krassny is being a smartass.

  Juliette asks, "Mr. Krassny, did you ever have occasion to fire your rifle in low-light conditions whereby you could see the muzzle flash?"

  "Yes, I did."

  Krempler stiffens, expecting what is to come.

  "Was that with or without the muzzle brake?"

  "Both."

  "To your recollection did the muzzle brake significantly reduce the flash signature of your rifle?"

  "Objection, Your Honor!" cries Krempler. "The witness cannot render a qualified scientific opinion from objective laboratory conditions."

  Juliette immediately counters, "Your Honor, the section 921 term 'significantly' is one of subjectivity versus objectivity. Lay persons are allowed to render subjective opinions regarding pertinent adverbial issues. There is ample precedent on this point, specifically US v.C"

  Fleming cuts her off. "I'm quite aware of the case law, Miss Kramer, thank you." He swivels his gray-maned head to Krempler and says, "Objection overruled. The witness may answer, if he has an opinion."

  Juliette smiles. "Thank you, Your Honor. Mr. Krassny, to your recollection did the muzzle brake significantly reduce your rifle's flash signature?"

  "No, ma'am. It changed the shape of the flash a bit because of the ports, but the overall size and brightness seemed about the same to me."

  "Thank you, Mr. Krassny," Juliette smiles brightly. "No further questions, Your Honor."

  "Do you wish to cross examine, Mr. Krempler?" asks Fleming.

  Still sizzling, Krempler replies, "No questions." Best to get Krassny off the stand and let the ATF video do the "talking."

  "Mr. Krassny, you may step down. You're dismissed."

  Law is nothing unless close behind it stands a warm, living public opinion.

  — Wendell Phillips

  Juliette will now rest for the defense. Since the ATF video is so damaging to her case, she decides to argue against the law — always a perilous tactic, especially in federal court. Krempler has waived his right to go first. She begins her closing argument simply.

  "Ladies and gentleman of the jury, why are we even here? To decide the fate of an honest, productive local citizen for having two ounces of steel at the end of a rifle barrel? For that he deserves to be punished with five years in federal prison and a $10,000 fine?"

  "Objection!" cries Jack Krempler, springing to his feet.

  "Sustained!" booms the Honorable Henry T. Fleming. "The jury will disregard that last remark by defense counsel. Miss Kramer, you are no doubt aware that a crime's possible sentence cannot be used to sway a jury towards acquittal! If that happens again, I will find you in contempt of court!"

  "Sorry, Your Honor," Juliette intones. She knows that no remark can be truly disregarded by any jury, especially after the prosecutor and judge had made such a fuss about it. Defense attorneys had a little saying: You can't unring a bell. The jury would no doubt discuss the fairness of the punishment for such a technical violation.

  "She's going for nullification," Krempler's assistant whispers.

  "Sure she is. It's all she's got," gloats the AUSA. "With any luck she'll land a contempt and sour the jury."

  Juliette pushes on unfazed. "Why are we even here? Because of a 'Simon Says' regulation which prohibits a flash suppressor on Mr. Russell's rifle. Oooooh! Thank God we have laws against that sort of thing — that and bayonet mounts."

  The courtroom titters with laughter. Several jurors smile.

  "I have here a bag of a dozen muzzle attachments. Eleven are muzzle brakes, and one is an actual, honest-to-God, flash suppressor." She dumps them on a table in front of the jury panel. Twelve black cylinders noisily roll about as she corrals them. "Can anyone spot the evil flash suppressor?"

  "Objection, Your Honor!" cries Jack Krempler. "This is wholly improper! These muzz — uh, items have not been admitted into evidence!"

  "Sustained!" Fleming instantly replies. "Miss Kramer, you will remove those at once! You are on very thin ice here!"

  "Yes, Your Honor." Juliette begins placing them one by one back in the clear ZipLoc bag, muttering just under her breath, "Are you the evil one? What about you? You look kinda evil." Most jurors are openly snickering.

  The AUSA assistant whispers, "Man, she's really pushing it!"

  Jack Krempler nods stonily.

  Regaining her stride, Juliette changes tack. "Folks, there is one crucial thing that Mr. Krempler from the United States Government failed to explain to all of us. It is vital to today's case." She pauses
for a moment and stares directly at the Government's table of attorneys.

  "Mr. Krempler did not explain that there are two kinds of crimes. A few crimes are mala in se, which is Latin for 'evil in themselves.' These would be crimes of violence and property, such as murder, rape, and robbery. By the way, we've all heard that saying 'Ignorance of the law is no excuse' haven't we? Do you know where it came from? From an 18th century British legal scholar named Blackstone. His Commentaries on the Laws of England had an enormous influence on our jurisprudence. Blackstone wrote about ignorance of the law in this way: 'Ignorantia juris quod quisque tenetur scire, neminem excusat.' Translation: 'Ignorance of the law, which everyone is bound to know, excuses no man.'

  "What is that law 'which everyone is bound to know'? Why mala in se crimes, of course. Everyone knows that it's wrong to murder, rape, and rob. Mala in se crimes are recognized in every state and in every nation as crimes, and they have been for thousands of years.

  "So, what's been keeping our lawmakers busy since at least the War of 1812? Creating new and needless mala prohibita — wrongs prohibited. These 'crimes' are not evil in themselves, but merely wrong because some group of politicians said that they're wrong. For example, that your backyard fence may not be over eight feet high, or that your home may not have rock landscaping. Or that recently imported rifles may not have muzzle attachments with a particular pattern of holes or slots. These mala prohibita — and there are tens of thousands of them — differ from city to city, from state to state, and from nation to nation. We've all heard examples of those old, silly laws still on the books, such as the forbidding of whistling past a barbershop on Tuesdays. My client, Bill Russell has been tried under Title 18 of the US Code for such a 'crime.' He risks being convicted as a felon — a felon, ladies and gentlemen! — for a perfectly harmless metal part costing the price of lunch. 'Simon Says' that his muzzle brake cannot 'significantly reduce' muzzle flash. Whistling past a barbershop on Tuesday . . . "

  The courtroom chuckles deeply at this. Jack Krempler says nothing, his face stern.

  "Mr. Krempler will tell you that the law is not on trial, that we must all obey the law — even if it's a silly one — until we have persuaded our representatives to repeal it. Now that's fine reasoning for a fifth grade social studies class, but it doesn't quite hold water in the real world, does it? Supreme Court Justice Douglas once wrote this about the law: 'When a legislature undertakes to proscribe the exercise of a citizen's constitutional rights it acts lawlessly, and the citizen can take matters into his own hands and proceed on the basis that such a law is no law at all.'"

  Every eye and ear in the courtroom is focused on Juliette Kramer. "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the law is merely an artificial invention to promote a reasonable society. That's it. The law is no more infallible than its authors. It's nothing to worship, and it's often unworthy of respect. As with any invention, it is to be valued and respected as long as it works. And for a law to work, it must be reasonable.

  "Here is the real issue in this trial. Is section 921, subsection 30, part B, subpart iv of Title 18 of the United States Code" — Juliette pauses to take an exaggerated gasp of air — "reasonable?"

  The entire courtroom giggles and Juliette's heart races with hope. Get them laughing, and they'll cease to fear. Without fear they can see the truth. She senses a tide turning in the room against the prosecution.

  "According to 250 years of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence, is it even a law which everyone is bound to know? I mean, who in this courtroom besides Mr. Krempler had even heard of the thing? Could Mr. Krempler quote, for example, subsection 27 or subpart iii? Ladies and gentlemen, I — like any practicing attorney in federal court — have the complete set of the 50 Titles of the United States Code. They take up nine feet of bookshelf space! The CFR administrative regulations, which can apply criminally to any one of us here today takes up twenty-one feet of space! I doubt that even Mr. Krempler himself knows every one of the hundreds of thousands of laws contained in thirty feet of books. If he does not, then how can he expect you or Bill Russell to?"

  The jurors are now looking at Assistant US Attorney Jack Krempler, who has suddenly become somewhat of a codefendant in the trial.

  "Who on earth could possibly live long enough to read and memorize thirty feet of laws? But that is what the Government would demand from us, otherwise, we're 'ignorant' of the law and 'have no excuse' and should go to prison!"

  The general mood is solemn as this point sinks in.

  Krempler's carotid arteries are clearly pulsating from across the room. What was an open-and-shut case J.K. is turning into an indictment of federal gun laws. How he hates this woman. He hates her springy step, her insouciance, her parody of the law, her lovely musical voice. He hates the fact that she has his own initials, and uses them. And he really hates that goddamned Laura Ashley dress she had the nerve to wear in court this morning, taunting everyone — especially that old goat Fleming — with her femininity. Why can't the little bitch wear a power suit like other women attorneys?

  Krempler tries to snap out of it, sensing that he is glowering. He considers objecting to Kramer's line of defense, but decides that it would likely come across to the jury as yelping.

  The tide of Juliette's closing argument continues to swell. "Henry David Thoreau had something to say on this point in his classic work titled On Civil Disobedience:"

  Must the citizen even for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward.

  "Does that sound relevant to these proceedings? It certainly does to me." Juliette pauses to gauge the jurors' mood. They are still with her. Good. Time to bring it all home.

  Smoothly, she continues, "Think of it another way: If Bill Russell's muzzle brake had fewer holes or smaller holes, it might not have reduced the flash at all. It would still be the muzzle brake as advertised and all of us here — especially Bill Russell — would be at home or work. So, what we're really talking about is an amount of metal less in weight and less in value than . . . a couple of pennies."

  From her palm, Juliette drops two pennies onto the table. They bounce on the walnut veneer Formica, surprisingly loud. One penny dies quickly but the other is made of more thespian stuff. Sensing the significance of its performance it bounces hard and sharp into a fast roll, veering to the left at the very last possible moment — as if humanly piloted — missing the table edge by an angstrom's whisker. Having achieved the court's rapt attention it then requires about a week and a half to cease languidly rolling around in infinitesimally decreasing counterclockwise circles, finally collapsing into the prolonged death diapason of a tiny manhole cover. Even by slow-acting poison, Hamlet expired more quickly.

  Juliette has the presence of mind not to move or speak until the penny has finished its brilliant cameo. By suspending the matter of US v. Russell for nearly half a minute — and for just two hundredths of a dollar — she has made her point. It is one of those clever courtroom tricks impossible to foresee —much less preempt — and inadvisable to interrupt once in motion.

  Krempler is beside himself, a mute retaining wall of fury.

  In a solemn, quiet voice, Juliette resumes the stage. "Two cents. Most of us lose more than that in the sofa every time we sit down."

  Krempler angrily whispers to his assistant, "This is the kind of crap she's really good at. Just look at that jury. They're mesmerized."

  "Two lousy cents," Juliette continues. "That's what Mr. Krempler and the Government think Bill Russell's reputation and freedom are worth. But they need your rubber stamp to do it. Don't collaborate with this, ladies and gentlemen. Bill Russell would like to go back home to his family, his job, and his community. He's been through quite enough already."

  Juliette pauses briefly to let this last point sink in. Then she very quietly says, "Only you have the power to do the right thing here . . . and I am trusting you to do it. Tha
nk you."

  Strong applause fills the courtroom, forcing Judge Fleming to bang his gavel. Juliette delivers that blinding smile of hers, returns to her table and sits down. Bill Russell has tears in his eyes and can only nod his thanks. A buzz of whispered conversations floats up from the gallery. The controversial trial had attracted a large audience, most of it in support of Russell. The locals did not appreciate the ATF's harassment of a long-standing citizen.

  "Mr. Krempler, are you ready to close?" asks Fleming.

  "I am, Your Honor," Krempler stiffly replies. He stands, clears his throat, and begins. "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I'm sure we all found Ms. Kramer's performance most entertaining. But it doesn't really change the issue at hand, does it? And that is the guilt or innocence of Mr. Russell. It is Mr. Russell who is sitting in the defendant's chair, not Title 18 of the United States Code or the ATF. Do not be deceived; what Ms. Kramer wants from you is a recipe for anarchy. Without laws, we get lawlessness. Ignore the laws you don't like? Well, then what's to prevent serial murderers and child rapists from ignoring laws inconvenient to them?"

  They already do thinks Juliette as she rolls her eyes.

  "Justice can be found only in a courtroom, not in the random, individual mind. That is why we are all here today. William Russell committed an offense under federal law. The video plainly proved that. But what about the opinion of Mr. Krassny, some may wonder? Yes, what about the opinion of an elderly man who may or may not be sympathetic with a fellow gun owner? Mr. Krassny expressed his opinion, but in the video we have all seen fact. Objective, scientific, measurable fact. And it is facts which must form your verdict, not mere opinion.

  "We cannot, ladies and gentlemen, pick and choose which laws to uphold. We must uphold them all, as a house divided cannot stand. This case is one of thousands of load-bearing beams in that great house of Law and Order. As you uphold this particular law, you uphold law in general. Decent society requires it. Please do your duty as good citizens and return a verdict of Guilty."

  Several hisses are heard as Krempler returns to his table. Wyomingites have never had any love for the US Government, especially when it chose to prosecute a well-liked, upstanding, long-time local citizen.