Prison Reform: Equal & Fair Justice (STATE V JOHNSON)
0 have signed. Let’s get to 500!
My father Benjamin Lloyd Johnson has been incarcerated since November 12th, 1994 for firing a single shot at a police officer (Jeffery Dauer), and striking him in the leg. He was sentenced 21 years, the MAXIMUM time allowed for aggravated assault in Arizona for a FIRST TIME OFFENDER.
For this same act (The One Shot that hit Officer Dauer in his leg), my Father was given an additional 21 years for the officer’s partner (Robert Handy) and 15 Years a piece for 5 bystanders who were standing close by (TOTALING TO 96 MORE YEARS ), even though no one else was injured. The United States District Court of Arizona vacated the 21 years for the officer’s partner’s count and stated that “There was absolutely no evidence of any intent to cause reasonable apprehension towards the officer’s partner or any of the bystanders”.
The Arizona Court of Appeals also held that “It cannot be presumed from the act of firing a shot at officer Dauer that Johnson ALSO INTENDED to scare officer D or any of the bystanders”. These five bystander charges are Unjust, because as mentioned above, this one act was already used to give my Father 21 years for “Intentionally causing physical injury” to officer Dauer’s leg pursing to Arizona revised Statue (A.R.S. Section 13-1203 (A)(1)(1989). As the court mentioned above, (It cannot also be used to support officer Handy and the remaining bystander counts, which were pursuant to A.R.S. Section 13-1203 (A)(2)(1989), and required a different intent.
It is not right that my Father is still incarcerated after already paying his debt to society (FOR 21 YEARS) for the crime that he committed. He has never had a second chance, and he is not a repeat offender. The Arizona Law (A.R.S. Section 13-116), which is a double punishment statue, states that my Father cannot receive these consecutive sentences based on the single act that hit officer D in his leg, just as the Arizona State of Appeals already held in my Father’s second appeal.
The Higher Court vacated the officer’s partners 21 Years based on this evidence. As for the five bystander counts, why do they still remain when the Court already stated; there was absolutely no evidence for officer Handy OR ANY OF THE FIVE BYSATNDERS. They should have also been vacated. WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE??? There is no evidence…Right is Right and Wrong is Wrong!
These five bystanders have also done affidavits in support of my Father’s release, stating under penalty of perjury, that they were not victims in this crime. Nobody should be incarcerated for any crime only because of Politics, Race, or because their financial status. The Law is supposed to be the Law, and no Judge should get away with abusing those Laws. The Law clearly proves, that my Father should not still be incarcerated, as the Courts have already mention based on the evidence presented in his case. See for yourself; and Google State of Arizona v Benjamin Lloyd Johnson, (NO. 1CA-CR 01-0204) (2003); and State v Henley, 141 ARIZ. 465, 687P2d1220 (1984). This is the case that the sentencing judge used to support giving my Father consecutive sentences which was clearly erroneous, because only officer D was (physically Injured) based on this single act, and the Judge knew this.
My Father made a bad choice is his early life but has paid his debt to society for that bad choice pursuant to the Law. Let’s see that our elected officials, whom are sworn under oath to uphold the Law, not just to incarcerate, but to also correct this huge MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. Please sign and share the movement.
#Free Benjamin Johnson #MBKMSK
Today: Benjamin is counting on you
Benjamin Johnson needs your help with “Prison Reform: Equal & Fair Justice (STATE V JOHNSON)”. Join Benjamin and 407 supporters today.