Edited on Sun Mar-14-10 07:31 PM by annm4peace
(maybe Teabaggers should read up on what real protesting involves and costs)
(also, Melissa does a lot of real reporting at events and doesn't get paid for it)
http://twincities.indymedia.org/2010/mar/update-g20-app...A few thoughts on last week’s G20 appeal hearings
Last week, I was in Pittsburgh again to deal with my appeal on my summary offense conviction of “disorderly conduct”. At this time, there were also a few other appeal hearings from other G20 arrestees for similar offenses. So on March 1st, I went into a hearing of four other G20 Arrestees to get an idea of how the summary appeal process works in Pennsylvania. There were three students and one non-student – all of whom were either arrested on the evening of September 25th near the University of Pittsburgh or the day earlier at Lawrenceville during the un-permitted march.
While none of these appeals had anything with the “failure to disperse” charge, the testimony that the Commonwealth gave focused on the Long-Range Acoustic Device (aka the sound cannon/LRAD), the location of LRADs, alleged dispersal orders, and generally alleged “anti-police” rally that evening. Sgt. O’Neil from the Pittsburgh PD stated that their intelligence indicated that a “anti-police rally” was taking place in Schenley Plaza and that they deployed the LRAD to disperse people from this area.
This testimony then went on for awhile as they described the encirclement of arrests, the LRAD systems and claimed that people had “thrown” a bottle at an officer without indicating who or where. We learned from the “LRAD expert” Officer Friburger that Pittsburgh had two LRAD models during this time a “500 model” that was on the “bear” and a “1000 model” that was on the pickup truck. We also learned that they had officers in the crowds trying to listen to these “warnings” from various vantage points. At one point, one of the attorneys asked Officer Friburger where the defendants were suppose to disperse to – and his response was “jail”, which brought a few laughs in the courtroom.
So despite the fact, that the medic, the students and the person who made wedding invitations were not individually seen doing anything disorderly other than being at the wrong place, at the wrong time, the first day of hearings went bad and all their appeals were thrown out. Under PA law, disorderly conduct requires that the defendants to be “engaging in activity that creates hazardous conditions”. The four arrestees all ended up with a $50 dollar fine plus court costs after the judge found them guilty.
What justification did Judge Gallo use for upholding these convictions? Judge Gallo stated that they were guilty of disorderly conduct because they engaged in hazardous activity that “endangered the safety of the officers”. He further went on to lecture the defendants indicating that the students now have a “record” that may hurt their chances at future employment - and that these defendants were taking place in activity that was “causing a riot” at an “anarchist anti-police” rally.
March 2nd Hearings
Rightfully so, I was nervous the next day when two of us had our appeals in front of the same judge. The other defendant got a lucky break when the arresting officer didn’t show up, which automatically sustained the appeal. Another arrestee argued their case pro-se when they were arrested on September 24th after commenting on the rough treatment of some of the protesters being arrested. Sadly, his appeal was thrown out and he has a $50 dollar fine to deal with along with court costs. Likely, what the defendant said was true and his arrest seemed without any cause or reason - but without an experienced attorney, it was difficult to get this judge to list to anything besides the State’s LRAD testimony.
Finally, it was time for my appeal to be heard before the judge. The commonwealth had three people testify against me, Lt. Trapp, an assistant operations commander that night for the Pittsburgh PD, an LRAD technician, and my booking officer, Sgt. Howe. Lt. Trapp provided the standard police story of what they were doing on the night of September 25th describing police lines and LRADs at various intersections, and attempting to stop the crowd at the “anti-police” rally. The LRAD expert came into court dressed in some sporting some militarized green camo clothing and discussed the LRAD briefly, once again focusing on the “failure to disperse” and the LRAD message.
Finally, my booking officer provided some testimony that basically amounted to seeing me standing around a few minutes before the arrest. However, he wasn’t the one who arrested me and wasn’t able to testify to what exactly “disorderly” I was doing and how I got there.
Then, I provided some brief testimony and told my story of how I was volunteering with Twin Cities Indymedia. We then presented a copy of the issued press passes. The Judge and prosecutor asked some questions about if the Indymedia press passes were issued by the Secret Service, which they weren’t as the Secret Service issued “official” press passes during the G20 to some news organizations. But otherwise, I told a brief explanation of how I was filming up to the moment of my arrest and how I wasn’t sure where to go to leave safely. The LRAD was blasting on and off the same message from the previous day with no directions or specifics.
Luckily - and due to some good lawyer skills on behalf of my attorney - the Judge sustained the appeal so I won the case and am free of the criminal charges. I would have liked to report that this happened in all the cases I saw those two days. However, it appears that sometimes the only way to find “justice” is to make sure you have a good, experienced attorney at whatever level you can afford.
Even with a personal “win” to celebrate, the overall conduct that the police and State got away during the G20 in Pittsburgh suggests that everything is suspended during a large event. Protesting, walking around, independent journalism, or even trying to travel around your neighborhood may leave you suspect to abuse by the State or arrest. Apparently, your mere presence at a protest (even if not protesting) may be perceived as being a “dangerous” condition for the heavily-armed and geared up riot police. Don’t forget you must listen to the LRADs that now appear to be legitimate tools used to disperse a crowd. As they gear up for the Toronto G20, the official security website already links to the Pittsburgh model and there are plans to the largest security operation in Canadian history. None of these police state tactics appear to be going away anytime in the near future.
Finally, my footage is still missing with no explanation and my camera sits broken. I filed a formal complaint with the local Citizens Police Review Board, which is stuck in some lawsuit as they try to get G20 documents to investigate the cases. We will see if that goes anywhere.