This week, liberty activist Graham Colson was tried for a "contempt of court" charge that he received while out on bail after being arrested on a later-determined-unconstitutional no trespass notice from the "city of Keene". In legal land there is a concept known as the doctrine of the "fruit of the poisoned tree". My understanding of this is that if, for instance, the police raid your home on a bad warrant (say they lied to the judge to get the warrant), that any evidence collected based on that warrant cannot be used against you. It's the "fruit of the poisoned tree", and so charges must be dropped. However, this doctrine appears to not apply to the "orders" of the judge. In Graham's case, he was arrested for violating the no trespass notice from the city that banned him from Central Square. He was let out on bail conditions that included no contact with a couple of parking enforcers. He was later arrested for walking through Central Square and talking to a parking enforcer. For this act he was charged with "contempt of court". Then, last summer, the district court's judge Edward Burke threw out the no trespass letter as unconstitutional and illegal. Since the no trespass letter was illegal, shouldn't the contempt case be thrown out too, since the bail conditions were originally issued on a case based on an illegal no trespass notice? Maybe in a system actually oriented towards justice -- not this one. So, the contempt charge went to court this week and Graham was found guilty, despite a valiant attempt to defend the charge by Garret Ean. Graham will be turning himself into the Keene Spiritual Retreat, aka the county jail to serve 60 days. He will have five months suspended over his head for two years. All because the city police were handing out illegal no trespass orders. Yeah, justice! ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ts4YW8hPYc