by Samuel Hopkins

Imagine the sheriff’s department unexpectedly showing up at your backdoor forcing you and your kids to go to your farm to see if you were abusing your cattle. A few days later they come back without a warrant and take your cattle. Then imagine you are arrested without so much as a hearing. Additionally, you are being threatened with forty-nine years in jail with a bond of $25,000 due to animal abuse claims even though you never abused your cattle. Finally, imagine spending six months defending yourself from prosecution, only to find out there was concealed evidence that would have proved your innocence.

This scenario happened to us when we lived in Marshall County, Tennessee in 2018. After all my family endured, we then sued and won against two members of the Marshall County Sheriff’s Department in federal court for illegally seizing cattle and forcing my mom to follow the detective’s orders in Hopkins v. Nichols et al (case #1:19-cv-00059). During the legal proceedings it was revealed that Marshall County had a practice, an unwritten policy, of stealing livestock and farming equipment from many farms using similar methods. These cases are examples of government coercion, a tactic used to force someone to give up property or persuade them to do something under threat. There are many tactics of government coercion such as eminent domain, rent control, and vaccine mandates. However, one subject rarely talked about is the weaponization of the justice system. Where there is coercion there is usually abuse of legal process. This abuse administered by federal, state, and local governments is a form of weaponization of the justice system. Black’s Law Dictionary, the most cited lawyers’ dictionary, states that ‘malicious abuse of legal process’ is “willful misapplying court process to obtain property not intended by law” (Black’s Law Dictionary, pg. 1110). Coercion, through the use of weaponization of the justice system, is unlawful, costly, and destroys personal freedoms.

Coercion, through the use of weaponization of the justice system, is unlawful. The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution requires the government to get a search and/or seizure warrant before investigations. In State v. Hopkins (case #318-CR-740), the criminal case related to Hopkins v. Nichols, no warrants were acquired at the beginning of the investigation. Additionally, the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution was designed so that no one can be deprived of property without due process. In our case, the judge coerced my dad to sell the cattle, as though he had been convicted, or face an outrageous fine, which is illegal. All states have rules that govern procedures in criminal cases. The definition of these rules, defined by United States Courts, is to “provide for the just determination of every criminal proceeding, to secure simplicity in procedure and fairness in administration, and to eliminate unjustifiable expense and delay” (www.uscourts.gov). For example, Tennessee’s Rules of Criminal Procedure (Rule 16) guide lawyers on how to disclose evidence. According to the request given to prosecution, evidence that was valuable should have been given to my dad because it was “material to the preparation of a defense” (Request for Discovery, Inspection, Brady Material, and Notice of Intent to Use Evidence, A11). The prosecutors withheld over 100 photographs, among other materials, that proved my dad’s innocence. These were coercion techniques since my dad was threatened with jail time if he did not obey orders. Coercion, through the use of weaponization of the justice system, is not only unlawful, but it also extracts money from the accused.

Coercion using the weaponization of the justice system extorts money from the accused within the court system. The Eighth Amendment of the Constitution protects Americans from excessive bail and fines. The government frequently ignores this amendment. For example, in State v. Hopkins, the government set bail at $25,000 and threatened a $40,000 fine, which is absurdly high. Furthermore, the cattle were forced to be sold, and the county kept the money. The government, knowing many Americans cannot afford this financial burden, implements these coercive policies. Due to the prosecution, my dad also had to hire a personal lawyer to defend himself, which cost our family more money. Moreover, we brought them to federal court to expose this corruption, costing us more than $250,000. These expenses were a huge financial strain. Coercion, through the use of weaponization of the justice system, not only robs money from the accused but also destroys personal freedoms.

Coercion using the weaponization of the justice system abolishes personal freedoms. John Jay, one of our country’s founding fathers, in 1774 said, “No power on earth has a right to take our property from us without our consent” (www.socratic-method.com). In State v. Hopkins, our personal freedoms were partially destroyed. Due to the coercion policies, we did not have the liberty to keep our cattle, and the court forbade our family from owning cattle for a year. This prevented us from feeding our family and having a second income. Additionally, my dad, who was wrongly arrested and wrongly accused, lost employment since he was self-employed, which affected his right to work. Moreover, we did not feel safe because of police intimidation, so we sold the house and moved to another county. These coercion tactics destroy people’s rights, trust in the government, and personal freedoms.

Coercion is used by the government to take property and to obtain more power for itself. There are many ways of coercion such as eminent domain, rent control, and vaccine mandates, but the weaponization of the justice system cannot be ignored. These can be considered an abuse of legal process. We certainly would have been better off if the government had followed the laws. Coercion using the weaponization of the justice system is harmful to Americans because it is unlawful, fleeces money from Americans, and destroys personal freedoms.

Works Cited

Black, Henry Campbell (1968). Black’s law dictionary (4th ed.) West Publishing Co.

Homepage. United States Courts. (2025, March 4). http://www.uscourts.gov/

The Socratic Method. The Socratic Method. (n.d.). http://www.socratic-method.com/