🚀 go-pugleaf

> It is my understanding that those wishing to plead guilty to the
> charge of civil contempt could do so, and 6 people took advantage of
> that.

No, not as far as I've heard  - can you back up this claim?

> The actions of blockading the road may have been civil contempt, but
> the actions of violation a court order was criminal contempt.

There are certainly laws regarding blocking roads but they do not imply
civil contempt.  The judge has said he ruled them in criminal contempt of 
court because they wanted to sought to put the court in disreput.  

>>Another complaint is the severity of the sentences when car thieves,
>>drug users, and tax evaders get suspended sentences!  It's my
>>opinion that the court is strongly biased in this case.

> Of course the court is biased against those who violate court orders.

I wish the court would issue an order against stealing cars, using drugs,
and evading taxes.  Actually, I don't think the court should have such
wide powers  - it can be abused you know :)

> People who fail to show up for court can and will be jailed.

This appears to be a bit off topic doesn't it?  Perhaps it is the fact that
44 people have been tried, convicted, and sentenced by one judge all 
at the same time that has confused some people and has them believing that
all 44 people did the same things and believe the same things.

>Those who violate a court order should know what the penalties are and
>consider the consequences.

>The penalties imposed were a long way from the maximum penalties.

What is the maximum?  Please answer this.

>My guess is that the next batch of protestors will face even harsher
>sentencing, and will deserve it.

Why should the next sentences be harsher?  Did they do it twice?  Did they
do it after the conviction and sentencing of the others?  No.  What is your
reasoning here?