A judge from Franklin County, Ohio is making vaccination against the CCP Virus a term of probation for defendants in his courtroom.
Common Pleas Judge Richard Frye started this judicial practice last week, according to WSYX, after recognizing how some of the defendants he encountered were hesitant to get immunized against the virus.
“It occurred to me that at least some of these folks need to be encouraged not to procrastinate,” Frye said in an interview. “I think it’s a reasonable condition when we’re telling people to get employed and be out in the community.”
Among the 20 individuals with whom Judge Frye came across last week, three of them have accepted the unprecedented probation term. All three had no religious or medical issues that may deter them from getting the shots.
It was not clear how all the defendants reacted to the requirement, but at least one of them, Sylvaun Latham, was concerned when he talked to WSYX.
“The whole atmosphere of the courtroom changed,” said Latham, “Everyone had this look on their face. I broke character and asked (my attorney), ‘Can he do this?’”
Latham was sentenced for a gun and drug charge last week by Common Pleas Court Judge Richard Frye, who offered him one-year probation in addition to getting vaccinated or an extended period of five years.
“I know Judge Frye’s reputation,” said Latham. “I know he’s known for giving the max time. I don’t want to go to jail. I also don’t want to have five years probation.”
The condition would demand the defendants who accepted it to get vaccinated within 30 days and present proof to the probation department.
Dreading the idea of five years long probation, Latham has decided to venture with the jabs but was nervous about his health safety.
“I’m shaking at this point. I don’t like where this is going. I feel like it is an overstep especially when he asked me if I’d get it and I said I really don’t want to get it,” he shared.
“That’s not like picking up trash. I know I’m in your courtroom and you have the absolute say-so over things but I feel like, that’s my health,” Latham added.
When asked what would happen if Judge Frye may meet those who are especially against the vaccines for religious, philosophical, or medical reasons, he declined to discuss the circumstances.
Meanwhile, it is clear that not everyone is comfortable with the idea of taking a chance with the experimental vaccines against the CCP Virus currently administered inside the U.S.
While the government and a part of American citizens believe getting immunized is a reasonable move to fend off the COVID-19 pandemic, others have pointed to the fact that the doses are emergency products, citing the rates of fatalities and adverse side-effects and refusing to gamble their lives with them.
Hence, when it comes to those who wholeheartedly hold that vaccination is a crucial step for society to rally from the lethal disease, it clashes with the vaccine hesitators’ wish for their personal opinion to be respected.
To Mary Holland, president and general counsel at Children’s Health Defense, Judge Frye’s practice should be deemed “illegal.”
“The shots at this point are Emergency Use Authorization [EUA] only,” she said in an interview with Life Site News. “They’re experimental. Federal law requires that people have the right to refuse an experimental medical product and that includes people on probation, people in incarcerated settings, people in mental health settings, it means everybody.”
“Coming out of World War II, the U.S. instigated the Nuremberg Code, and the first principle is: The consent of the individual is ‘absolutely essential,’” argued Holland, saying that the condition provided by Judge Frye cannot be determined a consent. “What he is doing is illegal.”
“People can’t be forced to participate in a medical experiment,” she added, “and because [COVID-19 vaccines] are not yet licensed – they only may be safe and effective – they are experimental. The clinical trials don’t end for the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines until 2022 and 2023. They are experimental. So they cannot be mandated.”