Convicted for Jesus

Full Account of Event - 4/24/18

After being saved by Jesus and baptised in the Holy Spirit in August 2016, I gave up everything in order to be an evangelist and disciple of Christ. My own family said I had mental issues because of my faith and alienated me for my new life in Christ. I ended up being homeless after leaving a bad environment at my father's house in Yuba city. I became a Christian evangelist from April to August while working at Uber and Lyft for four months last year, but for some reason my ratings dropped and I lost my job and my car was failing at the same time. I then became homeless without a car and on the streets as a Christian evangelist, and have been since August 2017.  However, I stayed with a Christian family from May 2018 to mid June 2018.

4/25/18 - Yesterday morning on April 24, 2018, I was sitting in Safeway on Hazel and Madison, where I am a frequent customer in Sacramento. I had a large posterboard sign that said "Repent, Jesus Saves, Study Bible, Storm is Coming Rev 13." The posterboard was leaning agaist a wall near my seat in the Safeway Starbucks cafe, and a member of the store told me that I need to turn my sign around because they received a complaint that it was offensive. I told them that is agaist my consitutional rights and my civil rights (Federal Civil Rights Act 1968). She then went and talked to her manager. 

Meanwhile, I was approached by an angry woman who said the sign was offensive, and I told her that her cup was offensive to me, and to please throw it away. Making the case that its my right to have my sign just as its her right to have her coffee mug. Keep in mind I was just kicked out of the Grocery Store accross the street, and a number of others. We exchanged a few more words and then the Manager came with the first Safeway worker woman who said I could not have my sign displayed. She told me if I turn my sign around I can stay. I told her its my constitutional right and my civil right to have freedom of religion and freedom of speech and that she would have to call the police.  

The police came and made me go outside, he told me that it was considered tresspassing and that I did not have the right to exercise my religious freedom in the public dwelling place of Safeway. They told me several times that I could leave and be free but I said its my constitutional right and my civil right to practice and exercise my religious freedoms in public. They then said I was going to jail, and handcuffed me, emptied my pockets in the front of the store, throwing my stuff on the ground, and said I might not get my stuff back (which is how I survive on the streets). The officer was mocking me in the back of the police car singing a song about how I should have got a job and the two of them were laughing and being merry and playing the devil's music.

I arrived at the jail around noon, they processed me, took my shoelaces and my belt, and searched me three times, and put me in the drunk tank. I was released at midnight that day into the cold of the night with nothing but my ID. I was able to call my mom where she allowed me to stay the night, and am now trying to find a way to get my belongings back, which is all I have left in this life to survive. 

Note - When I later retrieved my belongings from the Sheriff's Office in Carmichael, my Bose headphones were destroyed and my sign folded in half and my belongings searched.

After the arrest, I was left with a court date of 05/14/2018, for a misdemeanor count of trespassing and I have no money or no way to get there or survive except by my mother who lives in town. Please pray for my favor during this court hearing, if I am not raptured before then (1 Corinthians 15:52). 

In a way, the trip to jail was good because I told the people in the drunk tank how I was arrested for Jesus (The Creator - 2 Corinthians 5:19) and was able to find a bible and minister and pray for a few people while there. Hallelujah! Glory to God in the highest.

I am constantly being kicked out of public dwelling places for speaking about Jesus and making signs for Jesus:

• Raley's on Howe and Fair Oaks

• 2 Starbucks on Howe and Fair Oaks

• Raley's on Madison and Hazel

• Target on College Oak and Madison

I believe this is a violation of my 1st Amendment right and the Civil Rights Act of 1962, Title II.

Parable of the Vineyard Interview

https://youtu.be/H9CHTd2IFsQ

______________

5/14/18 - I attended my court case today, regarding being arrested on 4/24/18 and charged for trespassing for not tunring my Christian Jesus sign around to hide it after a complaint was made by a customer inside a Safeway Starbucks Cafe. The Management told me I had to turn my sign around or leave. I told them it was an infringement upon my civil rights and constitutional rights according to the 1st Ammendment and the Civil Rights Acts of 1964, as a restaurant is considered a public dwelling place and my rights are protected in that setting. 

The officers that responded to the call said that I was wrong and that I had to leave the property or go to jail, I chose to go to jail because it was religious discrimination and an infringement upon my constitutional and federal rights as a citizen.

Today, they offered to drop the case if I did not go back to the Safeway that filed the tresspassing order. I denied the plea because it was an infringement upon my constitutional rights and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The counsel I recieved told me that the federal law did not superseded the state law, she said that the Federal Civil Law Act of 1964 was still in effect but that Safeway was a private business and I could not exercise my religious freedoms inside. I told her that the FCRA of 1964 defined a restaurant as a public dwelling place in which my freedoms were infringed upon. 

I denied her counsil and requested the case go to a Jury trial and the next court date is 6/18/2018 and there is a possibility that I can serve 6 months in jail and pay a fine up to $1000.

Please pray for God's wisdom and guidance for me during this trial and Court proceedings. This country is in serious trouble and judgement is coming soon.  

__________________

7/6/18 - Today I'm going back to court regarding my case and hopefully it will be heard today as last time it was postponed. They wanted to give me a plea deal and receive a conviction but I told them my rights we're infringed upon and that I wanted to have my case heard before a Jury trial. The judge was giving me problems because I wanted to defend my case myself without a public defender so my next court appearance is 7/20/18, and I'm supposed to receive aid from a public defender on how to defend myself. The Jury Trial is set for 7/26/18 at the Sacramento County Superior Court of California. 

_________________

7/20/18 - This past week I called the Office of the Public Defender in Sacramento, as the judge had advised in order to obtain all that I need to defend my case. I called several times and left multiple messages with Robert Sorokolit and Kendale and other people assigned to my case. I have received no call back and now I am having to wait at court for two hours and no one has come out to talk with me. This whole process they have been stringing me along and asking me to forfeit my constitutional rights. Someone told me this was a trial readiness case and Kendale said she tried to contact me but I have not spoken with her. 

I spoke with the Court Judge and told them I called the Public Defender several times and haven't heard back. She said they called me and I asked to check my phone records to confirm but she wouldn't. Then the judge woman said I could meet with Kendale Mickelwaithe on 7/25/18 at 4:00 pm to find out exactly what I need to defend myself. Then a trial readiness case on 8/3/18 and then a Jury Trial on 8/8/18 if everything is ready.

_________________

7/25/18 - As per the court order, I went to meet Kendal Mickelwaithe at 4:00pm on 7/25/18, granted I am homeless and had to ask a friend to drive me, and when I arrived, Operator #5 told me Kendale left early and to check in Thursday at 10 am, and or Friday at 2 pm. This meeting was to obtain the documents needed for my trial readiness case on 8/3 so I can defend myself.

_______________

7/26/18 - I arrived at 10:45 and Operator #5, the lady from yesterday who would not give me her name, told me Kendal Micklethwaithe had to run to court, and then she asked me if I had an appointment today. I said are you joking? You told me to come here today at 10 am. I tried to record her with my phone camera but she shut the door on me.

My first appointment with the Public Defender was not met by the attorney,q and now they are telling me to come into the office and they are not here again. I slept downtown by the library with my sleeping bag so that I could make the appointment.

Kendal showed up just as I was sending her an email. She called me to her office and we spoke about my case, I told her the circumstances that led to the arrest. She told me she believes I am in the right and that my constitutional rights were violated according to the First Amendment when Safeway management asked me to turn my sign around. I discussed to her my beliefs on the as Bible and my need to evangelize in these last days and she said she would be glad to represent me during this trial.

__________________

8/3/18 - Arrived at the Jury readiness court check-in at 8 am and my attorney Kendal Micklethwaithe appraoched me and indicated that she is happy to defend my case and left me to wait for the meeting with the judge and the prosecutor. She later told me they were unable to retrieve the video footage of the incident but she subpoenad the Safeway manager and their story matched what I told Kendal so I will now have a witness. I also set to testify of what happened. My Jury Trial is set for 8/8/18 at 8:45 am at the Sacramento Superior Court, Department 9.

__________________

8/8/18 - Recieved a message last night from Kendal stating:

"I just wanted to contact you before your court date tomorrow at 8:45 in Department 9.  The district attorney has requested to trail your case, meaning they are asking for a new trial date.  The DA can do this for 10 days.  Please be present in court tomorrow and your case will be continued to next week."

This morning they gave me another court date of 8/16/18 at 8:45 am in Department 9. Before I went into the courtroom, I prayed and asked the LORD for guidance, I then opened my Bible to this verse:

Ezekiel 33:6-7 KJV — But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman's hand. So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me. 

Before leaving the courtroom, I stood at the entrance with my sign, and I felt the fire of God in my bones. Kendal told me I have to leave and that I might go to jail, I told her I have to warn them and I don't want their blood upon my hands. I then proclaimed this to the courtroom:

"Judgment is coming to this land, repent or perish in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. The sword is coming to this nation!"

The police officers there began approaching me and I left with the words spoken. 

__________________

8/16/18 - Assigned to a Judge today at the Sacramento Superior Court in Department 42, 5th Floor, and the Jury selection will begin at 9 am. Kendal asked to have the case dismissed on the grounds of the 1st Amendment but the case is set to go to trial. The Plaintiff claims I was disturbing the business and I testify that the report filed against me is not accurate.

__________________

8/20/18 - Arrived at the Sacramento Superior Court, Department 52, for the 9 am Jury selection. Kendal advised me that the court did not want my signs in the court or my bags and then it was decided I could hide my things behind courtroom. Later in the day, me and Kendal found out that there were a group of people in front of her office holding signs - wierd coincidence.

The judge continued to side with the Plaintiff, and that he sees that I was causing a distrubance and distrupting business. Yet, my attorney continued to state that I was exercising my freedom of religion under the 1st amendment. Ultimately, the judge allowed the jury to make the final determination. I stated that I was only deemed as a disturbance after someone was offended by my sign and asked me to leave based on my religion, which is discrimination.

Kendal indicated that she and one of her associate attorneys went into the Safeway wearing political shirts (anti-trump and black-lives-matter) this past weekend, and they were not asked to leave. She petitioned to have the attorney stand as a witness for the defence to show that I was being discriminated on, singled out, based on my religion. The judge did not see a reason to have her attorney friend testify, even though it is relevant to the case.

The Plaintiff said that he watched my testimony on Parable of the Vineyard YouTube regarding the case, and that I went into the establishment to cause a disturbance but that is false. I said I was tired of being kicked out of places for my sign and my freedoms, and someone told me that it was a violation of my constitutional rights so I decided to challenge it next time they try to harass me.

https://youtu.be/H9CHTd2IFsQ

During the Jury selection process it was revealed that the plaintiff asked to dismiss a jurer on the sole basis that she is a Christian. My defense attorney brought it to the judge's attention and after reviewing the transcript, the judge brought the juror back. Kendal, my defense attorney, said that happens like once in 7 years and was amazed. The LORD must have had His hand in it.
__________________

8/21/18 - The Sacramento Superior Court is not allowing my poster board signs in the building and will not hold them for me, so now I lost my signs most likely... They allowed them in yesterday, but not today. Satan doesn't want anyone warned! He knows where his final destination is... Injustice!

When I met with my Public Defender, Kendal, she advised me that she found my signs outside and took them to her office, hallelujah! Before the jury was summoned into the court, Kendal made a complaint to the judge that I was being targeted for my signs and that this is a public building where my rights to speech and religious freedom are protected. It seems a new policy was established just for me. The judge said it was out of his hands and the signs are not allowed in the courtroom but in the public building.

During the trial, a series of witnesses were called forth, some not very truthful, and the District Attorney tried to make the case that I was asked to leave the Safeway Starbucks due to my behavior and not because of my Christian sign. Yet, testimony records clearly indicate that I was in fact given an ultimatum to either turn my sign around or leave. There was no evidence, other than hearsay, that supports that I was asked to leave due to an altercation. However, I defended myself verbally when the customer approached me and told me my sign was offensive. Albeit, I was asked to leave before the exchange of words took place, and after the fact that I was asked to turn my sign around and deny my faith or leave - twice.

I was able to get my testimony on record and in front of the jury, while the plaintiff was clearly trying to make me out to be a violent/angry and intimidating religious zealout with unwarranted disputes. I was shaking under the presence of Yahweh and I knew He was with me. I'm being made to look like a bad guy, yet I was peaceable expressing my faith and was discriminated against. I am trying to warn of the wrath to come - the terrible day of the LORD.

I felt the judge and DA were trying to intimidate me in the notion that my account of events have already been publicly declared on the 8/17/18 during the Parable of the Vineyard interview, and that any discrepancies in my accounts may poke holes in my case. Yet I was confident that I have been truthful in my witness and my account of the circumstances surrounding the arrest and the events leading to the arrest.

Unfortunately, after the jurors were dismissed to lunch, the judge continued to neglect the fact that I was asked to leave based on my Christian faith and did not see the argumentthe defense brought forth for my case. Kendal gave an analogy - what if a gay couple or a interracial couple were found offensive inside the same Safeway Starbucks cafe, and a complaint was made to store management - would the court not see that as discrimination?

This presents a bias against Christians and a double standard regarding freedom of speech and religion. The court is supposed to uphold my constitutional rights yet I am seeing a clear bias.
__________________

8/22/18 - The plaintiff Mr. Kundinger continued to argue that this case is not involving the First Amendment, and petitioned the judge to take away the pictures from my Public Defenders' powerpoint used to present the defense argument. Kendal was quite upset at the order of  events. The pictures I believe had to be removed. Injustice! The Judge and the plaintiff are both failing to recognize my first amendment rights.

Both the defense and the prosecutor presented their arguments to the jury, and the jury is in deliberation until the verdict is reached. This afternoon the verdict was announced. Guilty.

Around six attorneys from the public Defenders' office were there in support of my case and we're shocked and outraged at the verdict. Kendal's Supervisor met with me and Kendal and we are going to begin the appeals process and my sentencing has been stayed until the court meets on 9/13/18 at 1:30 pm in Department 42. .

___________

9/13/18 - Went to Sacramento Superior Court for my appeals hearing for being convicted of tresspassing for my Christian sign and at the entrance of the courthouse, the officers would not allow my Christians signs into a public building. Woe to Babylon...

___________

Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento

Case# 18MI008940 - Dept. 42

Filled August 16, 2018

TO THE ABOVE-ENTITLED COURT AND TO ANNE MARIE SCHUBERT, DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO:

I. CALIFORNIA AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS REGARDING SPEECH AND RELIGION.  

                California prides itself on the fact that its constitution has always been a document of independent force and effect particularly in the area of individual liberties. In considering a free speech claim under article I, “we begin with the unquestioned proposition that the California Constitution is an independent document and its constitutional protections are separate from and not dependent upon the federal Constitution … .” (Los Angeles Alliance for Survival v. City of Los Angeles (2000) 22 Cal.4th 352, 365)   “The state Constitution's free speech provision is ‘at least as broad’ as and in some ways is broader than the comparable provision of the federal Constitution's First Amendment.” (Kasky v. Nike, Inc. (2002) 27 Cal.4th 939, 958–959.) Unlike the First Amendment, California's free speech clause “specifies a ‘right’ to freedom of speech explicitly and not merely by implication,” “runs against … private parties as well as governmental actors” and expressly “embrace[s] all subjects.”  (Beeman v. Anthem Prescription Management, LLC., (2013) 58 Cal.4th 329, 340.)  

               The present case involves a private party, Safeway, excluding Mr. Caldeira because of the religious nature of a sign and the speech contained therein.  Under the California Constitution the right of free speech explicitly applies to private parties.  Therefore, the provisions of the California Constitution regarding speech, religion, and discrimination should be applied to the Safeway store in this case.   

II. SHOPPING CENTERS ARE CONSIDERED PUBLIC FORUMS UNDER THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION AND FEDERAL CONSITUTION.

In the case of Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping Center the court held that “sections 2 and 3 of article I of the California Constitution protect speech and petitioning, reasonably exercised, in shopping centers even when the centers are privately owned.”  (Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping Center (1979) 23 Cal.3d899, 910).  In the Robins case several high school students were collecting signatures at a privately owned shopping mall in opposition to United Nations. (Id. at 902.)   A security guard approached the students and directed them to leave the premises since it was a private shopping center.  However, the officer suggested the students continue their activities on a public sidewalk outside the premises of the store.  (Id. at 902.)    

The court reasoned in the Robins case that members of the public are rightfully on the shopping malls premises because the premises are open to the public during shopping hours.  (Id. at 906.)   The reasoning is that shopping centers have become public forums or a place for public gatherings as more people have migrated from rural areas to the city.  The court stressed “that to prohibit expressive activity in the centers would impinge on constitutional rights beyond speech rights.  Courts have long protected the right to petition as an essential attribute of governing.”  (Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping Center (1979) 23 Cal.3d899, 908).   Additionally, the court found that “shopping centers to which the public is invited can provide an essential and invaluable forum for exercising those rights.” (Id. at 910.) 

In the case of Ralphs Grocery Company, the court held “to be a public forum under our state Constitution's liberty of speech provision, an area within a shopping center must be designed and furnished in a way that induces shoppers to congregate for purposes of entertainment, relaxation, or conversation, and not merely to walk to or from a parking area, or to walk from one store to another, or to view a store's merchandise and advertising displays.”  (Ralphs Grocery Company v. United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 8 (2011) 55 Cal.4th 1083.)  The court went on to explain:

That reasoning is most apt in regard to shopping centers' common areas, which generally have seating and other amenities producing a congenial environment that encourages passing shoppers to stop and linger and to leisurely congregate for purposes of relaxation and conversation. By contrast, areas immediately adjacent to the entrances of individual stores typically lack seating and are not designed to promote relaxation and socializing. Instead, those areas serve utilitarian purposes of facilitating customers' entrance to and exit from the stores and also, from the stores' perspective, advertising the goods and services available within.  

(Id. at 1092.) 

In the present case evidence will show that Mr. Caldeira was sitting in a café area in a shopping center.  The café is an open area, with seating, where members of the public gather.  The store was open to the public at the time. Mr. Caldeira was in the café.  Unlike the Robins case where the students were actively gathering signatures near an entrance to the store, Mr. Caldeira was sitting peacefully in the café at the store with signs which had messages regarding Christianity.  

III. EXCLUSION OF MR. CALDERIA FROM THE SAFEWAY BECAUSE OF THE CONTENT OF HIS RELIGIOUS SPEECH IS A VIOLATION OF EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.   

Under the Equal Protection Clause, not to mention the First Amendment itself, government may not grant the use of a forum to people whose views it finds acceptable, but deny use to those wishing to express less favored or more controversial views.  (Police Dep't of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92.)  Similarly, just because the entity involved is a private business they cannot discriminate against age, sex, national origin, or religion.  The Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids discrimination in places of public accommodation and removes peaceful attempts to be served on an equal basis from the category of punishable activities.  Under that statute, a place of public accommodation is defined  to include one which serves or offers to serve interstate travelers. (Hamm v. Rock Hill (1964) 379 U.S. 306, 308.)  The Hamm cases two defendants were convicted of trespass after a lunch sit in within a retail store.  In each case the defendants entered the store, made purchases, but were refused services due to their race. (Id. at 308.)  

Here Mr. Caldeira, like the plaintiffs in the Hamm case, was a lawful patron at the store.  Other members of the public came up to Mr. Caldeira and expressed differing religious beliefs than him.  Soon thereafter a manager from the store approached Mr. Caldeira and asked him to turn around his signs due to therein content and religious message.  The store however did not exclude or remove the patrons who were engaging Mr. Caldeira in a debate.  It was at this point Mr. Caldeira expressed to the store he was not going to leave because he was being discriminated against because of his religious beliefs.  

Similar to the Hamm cases the defendants, were shopping at the store, and were told to leave because of their “race, color, religion or national origin.”  . (Hamm v. Rock Hill (1964) 379 U.S. 306, 308.)   The defendants in the Hamm cases refused to leave, claiming discrimination.  Each of the defendants were arrested for trespass.  However, after review by the Supreme Court of the United States and an evaluation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the cases were dismissed against the trespassers because they were discriminated against due do their “race, color, religion or national origin.”  (Id., at 308.)   

Here we invite the court to dismiss this case as the notice of trespass and the exclusion of Mr. Caldeira from the store is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and for unlawful discrimination based on the content of speech as well as religion.

-----------

I was sentenced to 12 days in jail, 3 years of probation, and ordered to pay $1060 for not turning my Jesus sign around in a Starbucks Cafe.

I can file a financial hardships notice because I'm homeless, and the public defender'a office filed an appeal because this is a clear infringment on my constitutional rights. Hopefully they will have mercy and wave the fee and or accept the appeal that was filed...
Woe to America..

---------------

Written by Shane Caldeira

http://trumpetforyahweh.blogspot.com