"Thank You Jesus" Leads To Jail

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

MrsSpringsteen

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
29,274
Location
Edge's beanie closet
Well 6 hours of jail. I wonder why his son recanted.


I see a related Boston Legal episode in the future...


HONOLULU --Junior Stowers raised his hands and exclaimed, "Thank you, Jesus!" in court last month when he was acquitted by a jury of abusing his son.

But his joy was short-lived when Circuit Judge Patrick Border held him in contempt of court for the "outburst" and threw him in jail.

Stowers, 47, sat in the courtroom and a cellblock for about six hours until the judge granted him a hearing on the contempt charge and released him.

The judge at a July 7 hearing dropped the contempt charge, a petty misdemeanor that carries up to 30 days in jail.

Stowers couldn't be reached for comment. But his attorney in the contempt case, Deputy Public Defender Susan Arnett, said he wasn't treated fairly.

"I don't think there's anything about saying 'Thank you, Jesus' that rises to the level of contemptuous behavior in this case," she told The Honolulu Advertiser.

Stowers is a devoutly religious man active in his church who spontaneously expressed his thanks to the higher power in which he believed, she said.

Family members and Stowers' pastor at Assembly of God Church, Iakopo Sale, who watched from the gallery were "very upset that those words could land somebody in jail," Arnett said.

Border declined to comment but indicated the court minutes reflected his actions. The minutes showed he found Stowers' "nonverbal gestures and outbursts to be disruptive and improper regardless of content."

Court minutes said Border later dropped the charge because he realized Stowers' trial lawyer, Deputy Public Defender Carmel Kwock, did not have time to tell Stowers the judge had ordered both sides not to show emotion when the verdict was announced.

Stowers, of Honolulu, was charged with hitting his 15-year-old son with a broomstick in January. The misdemeanor charge of abusing a household member carries a sentence of up to a year in jail. Stowers was free on a $1,000 bond.

During the trial last month, the boy recanted his earlier statements that his father hit him, according to court records.

The boy instead testified his brother had hit him with a car door, a story verified by the brother in court.

Just before the verdict was announced on June 29, Border called city Deputy Prosecutor Sean Sanada and Kwock to the bench and told them he didn't want a show of emotion by either side, according to a defense request to dismiss the contempt charge.

When Stowers made his remarks after the verdict was announced, the judge told him, "There will (be) no more of that," the papers said.

Stowers asked to approach the bench and apologize, but the judge told him he could not and ordered him to remain in the courtroom, the defense request said.
 
Strange story.

Erhm, I’m actually curious about something. Can a person be held on remand indefinitely for ‘contempt of court’ in the US system?
 
Depends on the what the contempt of court was. People have been held for months.

Theoretically, I guess it could be indefinite. I have not been able to find if there is a limit.
 
Judges have too much power. And I'm not just saying that because of the nature of this case. I have always felt that way.
 
BonosSaint said:
Depends on the what the contempt of court was. People have been held for months.

Theoretically, I guess it could be indefinite. I have not been able to find if there is a limit.

:yikes: I hope that the people held for months had done something pretty unforgivable.

verte76 said:
I think it's very strange that this would be considered "contempt".

Me too. Maybe there had been a lot of outburst during the trial?
 
silja said:


:yikes: I hope that the people held for months had done something pretty unforgivable.

Generally for refusal to comply with a court order. They are released upon compliance or when their compliance is no longer necessary or if their contempt of court citation is overturned or when the judge feels they have been adequately taught their lesson.

I doubt that minor contempt of court is handled by more than a few hours or few days.
 
BonosSaint said:
Depends on the what the contempt of court was. People have been held for months.

Theoretically, I guess it could be indefinite. I have not been able to find if there is a limit.

Does the Geneva Conevention apply?
 
shart1780 said:
Welcome to the future of America. Things seem to be going more and more in this Christ-hating direction.

I honestly don't think it had anything to do with what he said. I think his attorney would like us to think that. It's more than likely that the judge didn't care for him and was waiting for a reason to hold him in contempt.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
The article says contempt can be up to a 30 day sentence.


Thanks. I assume for that contempt situation as opposed to
noncompliance contempt. I know Susan McDougal was held for 18 months for contempt for refusing to answer questions.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


I honestly don't think it had anything to do with what he said. I think his attorney would like us to think that. It's more than likely that the judge didn't care for him and was waiting for a reason to hold him in contempt.

You're probably right.
 
"Welcome to the future of America. Things seem to be going more and more in this Christ-hating direction"
Sorry, but the way I see it it's exactly the opposite. The supreme ruler of America is a right wing fundamentalist "Christian" - the majority in the congress and the senate are of the same ilk. If anything America is heading toward a full on THEOCRACY. These little minor incidents are aimed to fuel the fire. There very well may come the day when America becomes a full scale fourth reich of fundamentalist "christians". Youv'e got to admit that it seems to be heading that way. The scary thing in all of this is these people - these "christians" are in almost every way anti Jesus Christ. Quite spooky really.
 
I agree with you that most so-called Christians these days are anti-Jesus, but I disagree on everything else. Look at how Jesus is being portrayed these days. I'd know for a fact how alot of people look down on Christians (especially at my age, the future of our country). Most people I tell I'm a Christian and follow the Bible laugh at me when I try to apply it to my life (especialy the people at my work.) The fact that I'm not interested in drugs, drunkeness and sex causes my peers to scoff at me.

In public schools Bibles and prayer are becoming less and less accepted while other religions (such as Islam, especially where I live) are becoming more accepted. In a nearby school students are not allowed to make their prayers to Jesus known but they set a time aside for Islam kids to pray (there's a picture on the front page of my paper of Islam teenagers all bowing on the floor). While this attitude may not be too mainstream, it's becoming more and more common as time goes on.

The ACLU is a major player in getting Christianity (much moreso than any other religion) out of the public. They don't want the ten commandments posted anywhere in public. They've gone into some communities sueing those who have Christmas trees in their yard. They've even moved towards removing stone crosses from graveyards. It's horrible IMO. In schools around my area Christ themed Christmas songs are not allowed to be sung because people may be offended (even though it's Christmas... a holiday celebrating Christ). Department stores took down their signs saying "Merry Christmas" because supposedly anything that has to do with Christ is no offensive and improper. Nativity scenes in my state are banned now. They're even trying to take Christ out of Christmas.

Despite your opinion on if it's right or wrong it's obvious that there are many peope in this country who don't like Christianity one bit.
 
Last edited:
shart1780 said:

In public schools Bibles and prayer are becoming less and less accepted while other religions (such as Islam, especially where I live) are becoming more accepted. In a nearby school students are not allowed to make their prayers to Jesus known but they set a time aside for Islam kids to pray (there's a picture on the front page of my paper of Islam teenagers all bowing on the floor). While this attitude may not be too mainstream, it's becoming more and more common as time goes on.

I've never heard of any public school allowing any type of praying.


shart1780 said:

The ACLU is a major player in getting Christianity (much moreso than any other religion) out of the public. They don't want the ten commandments posted anywhere in public. They've gone into some communities sueing those who have Christmas trees in their yard. They've even moved towards removing stone crosses from graveyards. It's horrible IMO. In schools around my area Christ themed Christmas songs are not allowed to be sung because people may be offended (even though it's Christmas... a holiday celebrating Christ). Department stores took down their signs saying "Merry Christmas" because supposedly anything that has to do with Christ is no offensive and improper. Nativity scenes in my state are banned now. They're even trying to take Christ out of Christmas.


Gravestones? Really? That sounds like BS.

I love how the ACLU has become the whipping boy for "Christians" who don't understand separation of church and state.

And Ten Commandments and Nativity Scenes have not been banned anywhere where they should be displayed, i.e. a church. Just those places where they should be banned.

"Christians" just like to play victim in today's society... Personally I think they should spend more time caring about their own families, helping the poor and sick, and quit whining about how we can't have a ten commandmets statue at a court house.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


I've never heard of any public school allowing any type of praying.

Before the 70's it was actually quite common place.


BonoVoxSupastar said:
And Ten Commandments and Nativity Scenes have not been banned anywhere where they should be displayed, i.e. a church. Just those places where they should be banned.

BonoVoxSupastar said:


Personally I think they should spend more time caring about their own families, helping the poor and sick

Do you realize how many charity organizations were founded by Christians? Do you realize how many Christians have given up their lives in pursuit of helping hungry people in the US and all over the world.
 
80sU2isBest said:


Before the 70's it was actually quite common place.

There were a lot of things found common place in the 70's that were wrong and we don't do now.



80sU2isBest said:

Do you realize how many charity organizations were founded by Christians? Do you realize how many Christians have given up their lives in pursuit of helping hungry people in the US and all over the world.

:| Come on. Of course I know this, I just think as much time that's wasted whining could be used for better.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


:| Come on. Of course I know this, I just think as much time that's wasted whining could be used for better.

You and I are wasting time here, arguing about this, when we could be out feeding people, aren't we?
 
80sU2isBest said:


You and I are wasting time here, arguing about this, when we could be out feeding people, aren't we?

I'm not using a pulpit, the courts, money, or other people's time and resources right now am I?
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


I'm not using a pulpit, the courts, money, or other people's time and resources right now am I?

No, but you know what my point was.
 
80sU2isBest said:


No, but you know what my point was.

Yes, and I know you are one of the quickest to be an apologist for conservative Christianity, but even you have to admit there is a lot of meaningless whining and playing victim...
 
Muggsy said:


Really? how's that???

I'll give you a quick example.

A guy I go to church with graduated high school not too long back and would regularly take his Bible to class when he attended middle school. First day of high school he was asked in multiple classes to put his Bible away as it might offend others in the class. He refused, but was threatened to be sent to the principle's office. He didn't want to go through the trouble over something like that so he just complied with their wishes.

I've heard much more than just one story like that.

And BonoVox, how much time and energy do you honestly think I spend complaining about how much Christians are abused?

And when you refer to seperation of church and state do you mean that any show of religion outside of the home or church should be banned completely? You do know that the Christmas holiday IS meant to celebrate Jesus' birthday, right? Would you like christmas to be banned as well? Isn't that a celebration of religion?
 
Last edited:
The reason I posted this thread was I thought it was an example of the bizarre and arbitrary nature of the legal system and judges. I've seen outbursts far worse than this receive no reprimand from a judge, let alone contempt. And of course sometimes people don't go to jail for criminal offenses, much less an outburst of any kind-let alone thank you Jesus.

All this other stuff wasn't the point of the thread in my mind, isn't all of that discussed enough elsewhere here? I suppose I should have thought of that before I posted it, and then I wouldn't have posted it.
 
Court minutes said Border later dropped the charge because he realized Stowers' trial lawyer, Deputy Public Defender Carmel Kwock, did not have time to tell Stowers the judge had ordered both sides not to show emotion when the verdict was announced.

I'm sorry, folks. Hiding behind Jesus is not an excuse for violating an order to not show emotion for the verdict. He did violate the order.

However, as this article also shows, the judge recognized the possibility that he was unaware of the order, and dropped the charge.

And that's that. In this case, there's no reason to walk around like this is the Roman Empire throwing Christians to the lions.

Melon
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


Yes, and I know you are one of the quickest to be an apologist for conservative Christianity, but even you have to admit there is a lot of meaningless whining and playing victim...

There's a lot of meaningless whining and playing victim everywhere you look, BVS. Heck, in the athiest thread right now, some of `em are saying that athiests are mistreated in this country. You say I'm an "apologist" for conservative Christianity, but what I really want is for others to be held up to the same level of scrutiny, which they aren't, especially in this forum.

And I'm not whining and crying when I say that. I am defending myself.
 
Last edited:
melon said:


I'm sorry, folks. Hiding behind Jesus is not an excuse for violating an order to not show emotion for the verdict. He did violate the order.

However, as this article also shows, the judge recognized the possibility that he was unaware of the order, and dropped the charge.

And that's that. In this case, there's no reason to walk around like this is the Roman Empire throwing Christians to the lions.

Melon

Those are very good points, melon. And I find myself agreeing with you yet again.
 
shart1780 said:

And BonoVox, how much time and energy do you honestly think I spend complaining about how much Christians are abused?

I don't know anything about you except your posts, so I wouldn't know. I just know a lot spend way too much time and energy whining about it.

shart1780 said:

And when you refer to seperation of church and state do you mean that any show of religion outside of the home or church should be banned completely? You do know that the Christmas holiday IS meant to celebrate Jesus' birthday, right? Would you like christmas to be banned as well? Isn't that a celebration of religion?

No, I'm a moron I wasn't aware Christmas was a religious holiday.:| No, I wouldn't like to ban Christmas, just make sure it's secularized in government and public schools.
 
Obviously, the subjective content of the outburst gives this story a few more column inches than the typical jury case.

A contempt of court charge usually is levied after a explicit warning, and that after prior examples of behavior that are deemed unacceptable.

The case would make sense if defendant Stowers had made similar “Praise Jesus” outbursts, received a warning, and had done it again.

What is troubling is that the judge expects a defendant to retain their emotions when a verdict is read. In the context of an innocent person on trial, the pressure on the individual must be extraordinary. When the pressure is lifted with a non-guilty verdict, I can’t imagine a defendant being unaffected by the news.
 
Back
Top Bottom