Mohave County Buster Johnson denies freedom of speech to American Woman

Mohave County Supervisor Buster Johnson at his best, violating the First Amendment Right of an American woman for not removing her hat fast enough in front of his majesty.

"You gave up the statement when you violated the Rules"
Mohave County Supervisor
Buster Johnson

August 2, 2010 Mohave County BOS

Events that took place prior to the removal of Susan A. Moore – Bayer. I arrived at about 9:00 am wearing a baseball hat, I filled out my request to speak form for item 57 (dress code review by Supervisor Watson), and item 46 (County property taxes were to be raised). The television screens were showing the Mohave County Board of Supervisors desk empty, they were in an executive session. At approximately 9:27 am County employee Linda Romero announced that the meeting was going to start in a few minutes, please fill out your request to speak forms and turn them in. County employee Linda Romero did not state to the public that a policy exists and to remove your hats, the rule for procedures at the meeting was not displayed. Supervisor Gary Watson gave the invocation, and then the Pledge of Allegiance was given. I removed my hat for the Pledge, and then placed it back on my head.
Supervisor Buster Johnson spoke “We have some antsy people here, Chairman’s prerogative to move item 57 up. Supervisor Gary Watson spoke and felt that the rule passed 5 months ago was intended to be one way and it has turned out to be another. Supervisor Buster Johnson called for a 2nd, and then the motion to remove the dress code failed for lack of a 2nd. Supervisor Johnson stated that they have a policy, (and yet he did not request the removal of the hats) the meeting continued with the beginning of the Agenda. They gave a MCSO officer an award. Then the consent agenda was brought up items 1-45 were lumped together, as one vote.
Item 46 was read into the record and my name was called to speak on this item. I walked up with hat still on, I was told to remove my hat, and I replied that at the last meeting you allowed them to be worn. I got to the podium with my typed speech. I was again told to remove my hat. I rolled my eyes, took the hat off and replied “Oh Good Lord”, and placed it on the podium. I started to read my statement, Supervisor Johnson slapped the gavel and stated “remove her now”, I said I still have a statement to read. Then a man approached and told me mam you have to go, and I said but I still have a statement to read. He replied no you don’t, you must leave, and I said you have violated my right to Free Speech. The man then directed me up the stairs towards the door. I stated loudly, I have a purse young man, I will get that. He escorted me to my purse and then out the door, to the hall way. I never got to read my statement.

Susan A. Moore - Bayer email Susan

Watch the video of a Selective enforcement of this Unconstitutional county ordinance...

Ball caps' roar is muted by supervisors Today's News-Herald
Published Friday, August 6, 2010

Supervisors oust 2 from meeting for violating dress code
By JAYNE HANSON Today's News-Herald Published Monday, August 2, 2010

Golden Valley man claims he was assaulted before BOS meeting
By BRIDGET LEWISON/The Daily News
Published: Tuesday, August 3, 2010 11:56 PM MDT
pag1 - pag2

Dress code still in force - and enforced
Watson receives no second on motion to remove order
Kingman Daily Miner 8/3/2010 6:00:00 AM by James Chilton

Mohave supervisors oust 2 for violating dress code
Associated Press Posted on August 3, 2010 at 6:01 PM

ZANNA ATTORNEY VICKI LOPEZ WINS ILLEGAL SEARCH AND SEIZURE CASE AGAINST THE STATE vs Pastor Anderson

UNITED STATES CODE TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I - CRIMES CHAPTER 13 - CIVIL RIGHTS

§ 241. Conspiracy against rights
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured -
They shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results, they shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life.

§ 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such inhabitant being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life.

"State officers may be held personally liable for damages based upon actions taken in their official capacities."
Hafer v. Melo, 502 U.S. 21 (1991).

"When an act of the legislature is repugnant or contrary to the constitution, it is, ipso facto, void." 2 Pet. R. 522; 12 Wheat. 270; 3 Dall. 286; 4 Dall. 18.

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." - Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491.

"State officers may be held personally liable for damages based upon actions taken in their official capacities." Hafer v. Melo, 502 U.S. 21 (1991).

In Marbury vs. Madison (5 U.S. 2 CRANCH 137, 174, 176, I803), "all laws repugnant to the Constitution are null and void."

"An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no right; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed."
Norton vs Shelby County \ 18 US 425 p.442

The Arizona Open Meeting Law A.R.S. 38-431 shall govern meetings of the Board.
All meetings of any County public body, official or advisory committee shall be public and all persons so desiring shall be permitted to attend and listen to the deliberations and proceedings.

back to the homepage - Restore Freedom of Speech in Mohave County -
Census 2010 Unconstitutional - Gun Registration in Mohave County - Recall Sockwell - claim vs Mohave County