Navigating Courtroom Challenges: Truth, Free Speech, and Resilience in Legal Struggles- with Joeylynn Mesaros

What happens when the pursuit of truth collides with procedural constraints in the courtroom? Join us for a gripping episode as we explore this question with our guest, Joeylynn Mesaros, who shares her profound experience navigating a legal battlefield where justice seemed elusive. Joeylynn courageously recounts her trial experience, highlighting how strategic objections and a limited ability to present evidence left her feeling silenced. Yet, despite these challenges, the jury’s perceptiveness revealed a story of hope and perseverance, challenging the portrayal of defendants as societal threats—often exacerbated by media narratives.

The case underscores the significance of free speech and its broader implications for legal precedent. We delve into the emotional and strategic elements of the trial, drawing inspiration from the unwavering courage of the Patriot Academy members who stood by them. Their resolve, coupled with the spirit of our founding fathers, becomes a testament to the enduring belief that, even today, David can defeat Goliath. Tune in tomorrow as we continue this compelling conversation with Joeylynn on the WallBuilders Show.

Chapters

• 0:07 Biblical, Historical, Constitutional Perspective on Justice
• 12:49 Legal Victory for Free Speech
• 25:14 Inspiration and Courage in Fighting

Transcript

Rick Green

Welcome to the Intersection of Faith and Culture. This is the Wall Builders Show. We're taking on the hot topics of the day from a biblical, historical and constitutional perspective. I'm Rick Green, America's Constitution Coach. We're going to jump right in where we left off yesterday with the interview with Joeylynn Mesaros. She joined me in the tavern, my weekly show that you can see on Patriot U or at Warrior Poet Society Network, and we don't have a lot of time, so let's jump in. Here's where we left off yesterday with Joeylynn in the tavern.

Joeylynn Mesaros

The key plaintiff dropped the case and walked away. So not only was he not required by the judge to testify in this lawsuit, even though we tried to subpoena him, we couldn't even mention him in the lawsuit.

The jury had this much of the story and yet still truth prevailed. 

Rick Green

Wow, that's a he's, so I mean, it's, it's one side. They literally paint a false picture and you're not allowed to say it's a false picture, and here's the evidence of why it's false. And yet somehow the jury figured it. You, you know you and I've had this conversation offline. As a lover of justice and the law and all of those things, it makes me so angry when you can't present your case, when you can't say everybody's supposed to get their day in court and you're supposed to say here's one side, here's the other side, ok, jury decide. And the fact that you're literally like choked out and boot on your neck as you're trying to tell your side of the story and yet the jury still saw it.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

You said it. I cried out of sheer frustration when I was on the witness stand because I was restricted to yes or no answers only. You're probably familiar with this with the sidebar, and then all the attorneys go to the side of the judges' desk and there's this sound, this shh so nobody can hear the conversation.

Rick Green

They put white noise on. It's the goofiest thing. I don't know when they started doing this. They did that at Rebecca's trial and I'm like, wait a minute, that's the white noise I go to sleep to and I start nodding off it sounds like my sound machine. Yes, yes.

So we'll joke at home.

Yeah, yes, and then we like choked it.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

But you know, I was on the stand at every 30 seconds Objection Sidebar, you know. And then it's like you're only going to be allowed to answer yes or no Because I was completely. I was so prepared, rick, I was four years ready to unravel that narrative and give the truth to the jury. And they were furious that I wanted to expound, expand, to elaborate on my answers to them.

Rick Green

You wanted to expound, expand, 

Joeylynn Mesaros

, yes, right, and they wouldn't have it, and this is at one of your press releases. You'll have your chance to speak when your attorney comes up, so okay. So I have to answer yes or no to the questions they're asking me, which are set up to be answered in the way that that benefits them right, right and so and I literally said that I'm like, know, I'm still mouthing off, even though they don't want me to speak, and so objection, objection, that's three strikes.

I'm like, how many strikes do I? What am I striking out on, Like, what's gonna happen? Is it a mistrial?

Do I get another at bat Right and so you know, then I'm like fine, I don't want to blow this case for everybody. If we're striking down to a mistrial, I don't know what's happening here. So you know, then their plaintiffs come, finish, and then my attorney comes up to do the cross-examination and then they're objecting to everything he's asking me. Then there's another sidebar and he comes back and he's like okay, you're going to have to answer yes or no, only even to my attorney.

Rick Green

Unbelievable.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

Which is completely insane to me. And then the questions that they were asking me at the next cross-examination point, because then they come back up. They knew I couldn't answer them, so they asked the question. I'm like I'm very confused because I know if I begin to answer this you're going to object. I look at the judge. He says to go ahead, I answer it and then they yell object, objection. And then at the ultimate end of my testimony on the witness stand, the judge told me that was enough and that's what concluded my testimony.

Rick Green

Wow.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

Meanwhile their expert witness is up there for eight hours giving a college lecture on white supremacist tendency and no way.

Essentially that nobody has to be in any kind of agreement or communication to engage in a conspiracy. So they're saying they don't have to prove anything to prove that we were in a conspiracy. And they have this expert who's paid hundreds of thousands of dollars, who's up there saying that's true because collective action. So essentially and our homeschool parents and our constitutional coaches will know this but that circular reasoning, it's my definition. Well, because I said well, that's because Right.

And you can never get outside of that psychotic loop where they create their own rules and say things like well, my truth, and so you know. It's like dear God, is the jury going to buy this? It's like dear God, is the jury going to buy this? I mean because they spared no expense, rick, in portraying us as an absolute menace to society. We have reporters there that were calling us terrorists, with cameras in our faces on breaks, and they're going in and meeting with the plaintiffs on break. Talk about having the media in your pocket.

I digress.

Rick Green

 No, that's the stuff that nobody's going to hear anywhere else. So it's vital to tell the whole story. I don't even know where to go with all that. I mean, there's so much about it that is just the antithesis of what we think of as the American jurisprudence system, and there's so much work that's going to have to be done on that and to change that. I'm hoping that we're reaching this critical mass where, because of what they're doing to you know Sarah McAbee, who we had on a couple of weeks ago, who you introduced me to, and Rebecca Loverance and all these other cases I mean there's just so many injustices that are happening that as people hear the stories, they'll know changes have to happen here and these changes will have to happen in the legislatures and in Congress and in the law schools, like homeschool. Parents send your kids to law schools, but send them to.

Liberty and to Regent. Don't send them to these left-wing schools. We have to raise up a new generation of lawyers and judges so that Isaiah 1:26 happens I'll give you lawyers at the beginning, judges at the first. Then you'll be a righteous city. I know you know that one. But that's critical. To turn this thing around, you went in for no go ahead.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

I'm so sorry. I was going to say I can't agree more. I was actually inspired through Patriot Academy's Biblical Citizenship that talked about the judges and their immunity and how before there used to be such a small margin of error to hold accountable the behavior of judges the judges couldn't even be impeached for just being rude in the courtroom. We had a judge. Our magistrate judge wrote a poem about how much he hated us and read it to us in a sanctions hearing.

And he declared so he read it at 5 o'clock pm and he declared right before he read it that he wrote it on his lunch break. We hadn't even finished testifying yet. We came back from lunch and testified and then he made a decision and it was a sanctions hearing to determine if we destroyed evidence. And we're sitting up there saying absolutely not. We did not. It took a year for us to even get subpoenaed for this lawsuit and it was 14 months until we received the paperwork to turn over information for discovery. Nobody destroyed anything. It just by the time you sent it.

Some people's facebook pages were deleted some, you know, because the facebook fact checkers and I mean nobody's destroying evidence to hide a conspiracy. It's just real life. And so we're trying to tell him this. But by noon he had already written that poem and determined that we were a stain on the founding of our nation, an embarrassment to our founding fathers, a threat to democracy. We should be ashamed of ourselves. He's disgusted with us. These were words that were coming out, and he declared that he wrote that on his lunch break.

And he read it at five o'clock, so tell me that there's not a bias there when you're making decisions.

But they feel.

Rick Green

 No, this is an impartial judge. JoyLynn, Correct. This is an impartial judge that has no bias whatsoever to.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

Because he knows he has the prideful arrogance to know that he's protected under immunity because of 1960 Civil Rights Acts. And I'm here to say no more. We have had an inside access to see what people mean when they say the system is rigged.

That to me has just been a generic expression, or no, it is so biased and unfair I can't believe we came out with the victory that we did. That was God's hand at work and he gave us that win. He had mercy on us and he defended our God-given rights. There was no other reason that we should have won other's hand at work and he gave us that win. He had mercy on us and he defended our God-given rights. There was no other reason that we should have won other than God at work, because they did everything in their power to ensure a victory in all the wrong ways.

Rick Green

Right, right, no doubt about it. And so let's talk about the very end, the decision. How did that go in court? Did they come out and did the jury foreman read the decision? How? How did that go in court? Like, did they come out and did the jury foreman read the decision? Like, how did they do it? Was that an emotional, like traumatic? I would think that would be like I don't know.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

You know the whole thing has been traumatic. I was realizing in court that I was developing real time what would be futuristically post-traumatic stress.

I could tell that there are certain words or sounds or things that would be haunting me later, that I would hear it or see it and feel like you know, I could just feel that my brain has been in fight or flight mode for four years and is doing everything it can to identify every possible threat and keep me safe.

My nervous system has been on overdrive for far too long and I'm praying Lord, protect my heart and my mind so we can really recover from this when it's over. But when the jury deliberated for two days which was I can't and we had a weekend break in between it, so for four days we had this outrageous pit in all of our stomachs. We're forcing ourselves to be full of faith, but knowing how ring the system was, how bound and gagged, we were literally and metaphorically feeling hopeless, waiting for that devastating answer to only re-encourage ourselves that we'll win at the fifth circuit, right. So we're praying, we're waiting on God, but we're trying to be reasonable. I read a proverb that was like do your best, prepare for the worst and trust God.

That's where we were at right.

Yeah, yeah, and so they're like the jury has a question, we run into the courtroom and then it's just a clarifying question on a line item because it was so confusingly written to-.

Rick Green

Oh, the instructions to the jury. Yeah, yeah, absolutely Amen, right.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

So we go answer a question and then they go back into deliberation and then we're waiting again and we're praying. We pray in circles. The journalists were making fun of us writing down our prayers, publishing them in their articles, saying that we're conspiracy theorists that just think we can pray our way through it, and so I hope that they see that we absolutely did pray our way through it.

Amen.

And so finally they're like the jury has a verdict and everybody's just, I mean people's bodies were literally at an angle. They were running in so fast, you know, just like you can see the smoke behind them. And so we get in there and we sit down and the jury comes out and it's like my gosh, you know. And the first day the jury was selected I told Robert they don't realize our future and every American's future rests in their hands. And Robert said Joey Lynn, no, it doesn't, it rests in God's hands.

I'm like you're right. Keep reminding me of that.

And so they come out and I'm like, oh my gosh, oh my gosh, here it is, here it is. And I don't have experience with getting sued. I've never been in a courtroom.

I've never even been to the principal's office, so I have no idea what's happening, right, everything I learned.

Rick Green

 I can tell you all about that another time, but go ahead,

Joeylynn Mesaros

 yeah. So I'm like okay, so the jury foreman, I think is what it's called stands up and says your honor, we've reached a verdict, and he hands a piece of paper over to somebody and then that person takes it to the judge the bailiff that's the word, yeah. The bailiff takes it to the judge and the judge's jaw clenches.

Rick Green

Seriously.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

Oh my gosh Lord, Is that a victory?

Rick Green

Seriously, oh wow.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

And then he hands it to a woman in front of him and says that she can read it. And so I will say again, to quote Robert we saw a 90% victory. Rick, there is one defendant who received fines and it's under the ku klux klan law, and it has to be won on appeal in order for us to have a 100 victory, but that's actually that and we'll talk about that in a second because I actually think that's good, because a lot of the arguments y'all weren't able to make in court can be made in this case, i'm'm thinking.

Joeylynn Mesaros

 Praise God.

Rick Gren

Yeah, I haven't asked you about that yet, so I don't know if that's the case. Yes, and I don't know enough about which defendants are which, so I want to ask you that too. Yes, but go back to the reading. So what does she say? Does she separate out?

Joeylynn Mesaros 

What is there? Five of us, pretty average people just sitting there waiting to hear are we going to be associated forever with the Ku Klux Klan law and has the First Amendment gone completely down the toilet in our nation, or is there any kind of hope to hold on to?

Rick Green

Our folks quick break, We'll be right back. You're listening to the WallBuilder Show.

Break

Rick Green

Welcome back to the Wall Builder Show, jumping right back into the episode that we're sharing the entire episode from the tavern with Joeylynn Mesaros and this incredible, incredible victory for free speech.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

And the gentleman who received the guilty verdict under the Ku Klux Klan law. His name is Cisco Cisneros and that's his nickname. His first name is Eliazar.

Rick Green

So he's the veteran.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

Yes, sir, that's the veteran. And so they say in the case of Eliazar Cisneros. And then it reads the question like do you find that this defendant has violated the Ku Klux Klan law in conspiracy to intimidate, whatever, whatever? And it says yes. And if answered yes, what is the amount of damages that is assigned? Or something like that. And it was $10,000. It was like I mean, we've raised millions of dollars in legal fees up to this point between all six of us defendants, right?

I mean that's a drop in the bucket. It's on principle that we need to win. Right, right, um, and. And then it was like uh, and then they continued to read. So there were three charges that were brought against all of us, rick. So it was a ku klux klan law for conspiracy.

It was a Texas a civil assault law, because they said we used our vehicles like deadly weapons oh my goodness I know, and then there was a third one, and I I wish that I was um articulate enough to describe all of these to you but I'm not so please forgive me no, that's fine, you're doing grat yes so there were essentially 18 charges they had to work through for all six of us, for three each and the first one was the first one was the ku klux klan.

And so in retrospect I see now that they were going law by law. We thought they were going person by person. So we're like, oh man, like here it goes, like we all are charged under the Ku Klux Klan law for conspiracy. And so they read, you know, Eliza Cisneros, yes, and then the Texas civil assault law, no, and then the next law, no. And then they hand the paper back to the judge and the judge is like and with that, are there any objections or any, you know? And I'm like, I'm looking at the other defense, like what are they going to read in the case of JoeyLynn Massaro?

in the case of Robert Massaro. Right, and so we have no idea what's going on. Cisco's attorney gets up and objects and says essentially that he ought not to be found guilty and it would be in the judge's best interest to overturn the jury's decision to avoid an appeal, which is where it was headed. Next, and the judge, instead of saying that was denied, which he denied, every other blessed thing we ever objected to this entire trial, while the plaintiffs got every freaking thing they wanted.

He said I'll take that into consideration. And he said and with that court is adjourned. And so we're like what happened? What? And the attorney turns around and goes oh, you're not guilty. And I'm like I thought they were gonna say joeylynn not guilty. Why didn't we say that? Yeah, what was?

our magical moment. We needed that announcement. Yeah, we'll do it. We'll do a reenactment. Yeah, well, thank you with the hand, with a gavel that'd be.

There was no gavel either. And so, but then it was this conflicting, emotional. You know, we wanted it to be completely across the board, we wanted every single one of us to walk out of there 100% win. But we all felt so encouraged, even Cisco, because, rick, you know, we already filed a writ of mandamus with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. They said if we didn't like the jury outcome they would intervene and uphold the law, and they encouraged us to do that.

Not to mention, all of us were found not guilty, but just him I mean everything is stacked in the favor of that decision getting overturned.

Plus we know in their case with this judge, the Fifth Circuit overturns his decisions all the time. Well, it was a Texas heartbeat bill before Roe v Wade was overturned, and we know it was the same case with Bonnie Wallace and the library books, right, I mean. So she had her case with the Fifth Circuit today as well, and so we know that getting it into their court will be favorable, and he knows that, which is why we believe that he took under advisement potentially overturning that decision.

Rick Green

That's right. He might change it judgment, notwithstanding what the jury did. What was the? Was there a factual difference Like, did he drive different? I mean, what was their? Did they present something different in his evidence that you think might've caused them to say, okay, we're going to throw a bone to the plaintiffs and give them this one charge.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

Yes, I do. I do think that's what happened and I'll give you four reasons why, the first reason being one of the jury notes where we came in because they wanted a clarifying question. The jury note said we have come to an agreement on five of the defendants. We have a question about one that we cannot agree on. What do we do? And the instructions that went back to them were well, it's either a mistrial or you can agree, they said, and we assumed at that point it was Cisco and I'll explain why in a moment. They come back with another question and say well, we're very unclear about the instructions one through four, and you could tell by the context of what the questions were based on, leaving reasonable doubt that because there was no cell phone discovery, provided that there could have been a conspiracy that you don't know about.

Rick Green

Oh my gosh.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

They're like do we have to consider that? Is that an instruction that we must Right? So it was. They were very confused. It was very unclear and, in his case now backing up the evidence that they brought against him to paint this picture of conspiracy, paired with ridiculous things like you don't have to know anybody to engage in a conspiracy, you don't have to actually talk to anybody to be in a conspiracy. You can accidentally stumble into one and decide hey, I enjoy that. It looks like we're all trying to run the bus off the road. Yeah, I'm part of this now you know. I mean it's so ridiculous how they were trained. I mean they act like the jury doesn't have a brain, right yeah so.

However, the instructions confused the jury. The jury is able to exercise common sense.

We can see that with our five not guilty verdicts but they were extremely confused, and so part of the other evidence that they brought against cisco is that he was, I think, one of the first people to find out that this bus was coming to town. So, like I found out about it a couple hours beforehand, he knew about it a few days beforehand and he talked to somebody else about it and there were there was an email communication there showing that they had spoken about it. I mean nothing out of the ordinary, just hey, it wasn't it.

Rick Green

It wasn't that he got closer to the bus or any of that kind of stuff. It was just simply that he actually talked to people about having a. Trump train, which should be perfectly fine, which also tells you you said this earlier why they actually what they really wanted out of this and back to you and I've had this conversation what they really wanted was silence. They really wanted to intimidate y'all and ruin your lives so they could intimidate me and everybody else in the world, Right, so that we wouldn't speak up. That's the whole deal, Exactly.

So, just the fact that he had communications with people about we're going to go do a Trump train is insane, but I hear what you're saying. That would have confused them enough to think well, does that mean because he had communications somehow that violated the. Kkk statute.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

That's it. And they did not have a copy of the First Amendment. They didn't have instructions on the First Amendment that were appropriate. We argued and objected to that. This is not the definition of the First Amendment. It's been modified, it's been watered down and changed.

Wow, and it would not be modified or restored and we could not reference the Constitution, and so they don't have and stored, and we could not reference the constitution, and so they don't have. And you know, we know how little people really know what the constitution says and what those basic rights are. They certainly probably don't have it memorized like we do you know, or like you do, and so they're not, they're not able to to do just with what they've been given.

It gated them into making that decision

Rick Green

oh yeah yeah, because, because they think they're saying they think they're actually answering the question. Did he have conversations with people? Well?

yeah he did, right? Not that they're actually answering the question. Did he have conversations with people that were a conspiracy to commit a crime? You know, that's that's the difference. They don't connect all those dots, and that's why I hate these jury instructions in the first place. Yeah, okay, I I gotta ask, though, man, I wish honestly, I wish his attorney hadn't objected, because if this judge does set his conviction aside and there's no appeal, I mean what a missed opportunity, because the appeal is where it would be important for an appellate court and maybe even the Supreme Court eventually, to say redefining the first amendment, limiting the information that could be.

All the things that happened could have potentially been addressed by the Fifth Circuit. So who knows, who knows where all of that will go. But just praise God that for y'all it's complete victory, complete victory. Joeylynn, you have led the charge on this. You have been the one to say absolutely not, I will not cave, I will not give in, I will not give up my rights, because you learned what your rights were and you learned leading the charge on this. And I know our friends at Remnant Alliance came to the aid of the pastor and his wife and there's been some help that's come along in just the last few weeks, and that's all great, but you've been scratching and clawing for four years.

You have been raising it a dollar at a time, a thousand dollars at a time. You've been begging your attorneys. Don't get rid of me, I'll raise that. We'll figure out a way to do this. You guys have bankrupted yourself over this and yet had a joyful, warrior attitude the entire time. You've been absolutely incredible through this whole thing, and I meant what I said earlier. The whole process was God sharpening you. I don't know what all he's got in works for you. I hope that part of it's with Patriot Academy in some way. But I just know God's going to use all of this to amplify your voice in the same way he amplified Rebecca's voice. But it's just going to be.

It's not just for this season, though, I'm telling. Telling you he's got his hand on your life and and to watch your family pull together. And I know it wasn't easy and there had to be times where y'all somebody was on the couch because y'all just had to say you know, I'm done, I'm tired of fighting this fight. You know, I just thank you.

Joeylynn Mesaros 

Thank you for being such a warrior thank you for tirelessly pouring into us, for continuing to, to love us, to check on us, for treating us like family. You and Kara and your children and the Patriot Academy family wrapped their arms around us and because people believed in us, people educated us, people equipped us, we were able to do this. We were able to do the impossible with God's help, and God provided every step of the way, and it's been an incredible journey. They were asking us in court well, knowing what you know today, would you do this again? And every single one of us would.

Every single one of us that stood there refused to settle. We refused to back down. We knew what was on the line. It was bigger than us. We represented the American people in that courtroom. It had nothing to do with us. They were after free speech rights and most Americans didn't know what was going on. But you guys understood the significance and the importance and y'all breathed that life into us and we took courage and we took inspiration from our founding fathers and it was an honor and it was a privilege to be able to fight this fight and we had people that came and flew in to visit us from Patriot Academy and I said, oh my gosh, you didn't have to do that. And they said well, why not? It's our job to put on the line our life, our fortune and our sacred honor.

And so that's what we're going to do and so I mean you mentioned this before, but during the course of our trial we went through Patriot Day and Constitution Day, and so it was just. It was monumental, it was sentimental, it was powerful pathetic faces on the plaintiff's counsel who who spun these elaborate tales and were so arrogant and so cocky because they live in their own bubbles and they really think that they're doing something for democracy and they think that by ruining people's lives that they're actually making a mark in history all right, folks out of time for today.

Rick Green

We will pick right back up with the interview with Joey Lynn when we return tomorrow on the Wall Builders Show. You can get all of this at wallbuilders.show Wallbuilders.show. Share these programs with your friends and family. Let them know David can still defeat Goliath. You've been listening to the WallBuilders Show,