Get the Flash Player to see this player.

CONFRONTATION

My friends Peg and Dan bought raw land in Topanga Canyon, California zoned agricultural.  Soon after they purchased their land, they began to clear dirt from a mudslide off an existing road on their property… That’s when their troubles started and the idea for SINS OF COMMISSION took root.

 

In this scene, the California Coastal Commission’s deep rooted disregard for constitutional rights is evident.  The commission knew that in regulatory law, the presumption of correctness is with the commission. Dan, to protect himself against false charges, had to document the inspection since he would not be taken at his word.

 

The commission found out that Dan intended to videotape the inspection, which he was completely within his rights to do so. In light of this, shockingly, the commission was able to convince a judge to issue a court order prohibiting Dan from exercising his rights to videotape the commission’s inspection.   A camera would be critical for Dan and Peg’s defense.

 

In regulatory law the courts presume what a commission does is correct.

When the California Coastal Commission found out cameras would be on site to document the inspection, they convinced a state judge to issue a court order prohibiting videotaping  -  something that not only runs against freedom of the press guaranteed in the United States Constitution, but the courts knew Peg and Dan had to do to protect themselves against false charges by the commission.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.