The St. Patrick's Four - persecution by US Govt begins Monday.

[Skip Intro]

"The first and only federal conspiracy trial arising out of civil resistance to the Iraq War begins September 19 in Binghamton, NY."

Apologies if this is a GD dupe, the only other thread I saw on this was struggle4progress' in the Religion and Theology forum:

After Hung Jury, 4 Who Poured Blood at Upstate Army Center Face U.S. Trial http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x26457

and with all respect to that poster, this begs for a GD thread imho.

This is our government going after - big time - those who demonstrate against it.

An article about it, followed by the website of the SP4 itself:


The St. Patrick's Four Return to Trial
http://www.countercurrents.org/us-saavedra170905.htm

snip:
-----------------------------
On Monday, September 19, the rights of all peace activists go on trial. Representing us are four Catholic anti-war activists who have already stood trial for their stand against the invasion of Iraq. Now, more than two years later, cleared of the original charge of criminal mischief, they are being charged with conspiracy and will be tried again.
-----------------------------

snip:
-----------------------------
THE CRIME: On March 17, 2003, Dan, Clare, Peter, and Teresa entered a military recruiting center in Lansing, New York, and poured a half cup of their own blood around the vestibule. No one was prevented from entering or leaving the recruiting center as they then knelt and read the following statement....
-----------------------------

snip:
-----------------------------
The following month the four were tried for criminal mischief. Nine of the twelve jurors voted to acquit them, and after twenty hours of deliberation, the judge declared a mistrial. At such declaration the crowded courtroom gave the Four a standing ovation. The District Attorney said that he would not re-prosecute them, expecting that another jury would yield the same verdict.

A year later, however, the U.S. government decided to retry the four peace activists, this time on the more serious charges of conspiracy. Technically, they are charged with conspiracy to impede "by force, intimidation and threat" an officer of the United States and three lesser charges. The trial begins Monday, September 19, and if the four are convicted, the penalty could be up to six years in prison and $250,000 in fines.
-----------------------------

snip:
-----------------------------
This will be the first federal conspiracy trial arising out of civil resistance to the invasion of Iraq. It will also be the first federal conspiracy trial of anti-war protesters since Viet Nam.
-----------------------------


and the website for the SP4 themselvess, where you can get full info and declare support:


St. Patrick's Four
http://www.stpatricksfour.org/index.php

snip:
-----------------------------
The first and only federal
conspiracy trial
arising out of civil resistance
to the Iraq War begins
September 19 in Binghamton, NY.

Summary. Two days before the invasion of Iraq, four Catholic Workers from Ithaca (NY), in an act of non-violent civil resistance, entered a military recruiting center, read a statement, and carefully poured their own blood around the vestibule. The four, all parents, were tried in Tompkins County Court in April 2004 on charges of criminal mischief. Nine of twelve jurors voted to acquit.

However, almost a year later, the US government decided to retry the four, now on charges of conspiracy. If convicted, they face up to six years in prison and $250,000 in fines. The St. Patrick's Four trial begins September 19 in Binghamton, NY.
-----------------------------

[JDPriestly]

1. The law must apply to all.

I sympathize with the anti-Iraq War sentiments of the four from Ithaca, and I support their right to protest the War. But they should not have staged the kind of action they did in a place, which, although owned by the public, is not a forum in which political protest is appropriate.

Change the facts. Four Catholic Pro-Lifers walk into an abortion clinic and pour their own blood all over the vestibule. Do you think they should be prosecuted for vandalism, possibly, depending on the time of day that they do it, prosecuted even for conspiracy to violate the civil rights of women who could not have abortions in that clinic because the Pro-Lifers were demonstrating in it? I'm staunchly pro-choice, but even if I weren't I would condemn their choice of the place for their protest.

The Ithaca Four had the civil right to protest, but the government had the right to regulate the time, place and manner of their protests provided the regulation is reasonable. Certainly, it is reasonable to prohibit protesters from entering a recruiting center. The Ithaca Four should have protested outside the recruiting center, not in it.

Some of the constraints on free speech under the Bush regime have been unreasonable, but in this case, I think the regulation as applied is reasonable. It's up to the jury to decide this.

[JanusAscending]

2. YOU ARE WRONG!!

Ever hear of "DOUBLE JEOPARDY"??? They have the right to free speech and non- violent protest in the America I used to know. This is complete "Bushit", and the beginnings of a "police state"!!! They have already been tried and found innocent. They are not service men and women, therefore the military has no jurasdiction in this case!!PERIOD!!

[JDPriestly]

3. They will have to prove the elements of double jeopardy

to prevail on that theory. As for the lack of military jurisdiction, I would hope you are right, but I am not familiar enough with that law to be able to say for sure.

Yes, we have the right to free speech and non-violent protest, but the government can regulate the time and place of our speech and protest as long as the regulations are reasonable. Personally, I think a regulation prohibiting protesters from entering a building and spilling blood around is reasonable, regardless of whether the building is private or publicly owned but not a public forum. As I pointed out, I, as a supporter of the right to choose, think that right-wingers who spilled their blood in an abortion clinic waiting room should be prosecuted for something -- vandalism at least, and made to pay for the damages to the building.

[H2O Man]

4. "Change the facts."

Why? Let's not change the facts. Let's simply stick to them.