will not be Deterred from Future Actions by Possible Jail TimeThe following was written by Joy First, a Madison Wisconsin Peace Activist who lives her understanding of Dr. King. I am honored to know her.
Joy First
January 18, 2008
I joined 34 other activists and supporters in an action of nonviolent civil resistance in the United States Capitol on September 20, 2007. We were there to speak out against our government’s war of aggression in Iraq that is causing enormous human suffering to uncountable children, women, and men, following the principles of nonviolence taught by Gandhi and King.
Our action, “Rivers of Blood” was planned and organized by the National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance (www.iraqpledge.org), and the activists came together from all over the country including from Alaska, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, and even from Cambodia.
We gathered in a corner of the crypt of the U.S. Capitol, a large room directly beneath the Capitol dome where tourists have the opportunity to look at exhibits about the architecture of the Capitol. We were wearing simulated blood spattered t-shirts and we each had the name and a picture of a victim of the carnage in Iraq. One by one we read aloud the name of the person we were representing and then fell to the ground in solidarity with those who have lost their lives in this tragic war and occupation. As we fell to the ground we used red streamers to illustrate the rivers of blood flowing in Iraq, but starting in the US Capitol. We were arrested and eventually charged with Disorderly Conduct and Unlawful Assembly. The US Capitol Police held us for about five hours for processing and then released us.
Thirty-one defendants returned to the DC Superior Court for trial on January 16, 2007. Eventually a 2 ½ day bench trial was held, Judge Ann Keary presiding. We represented ourselves as pro se defendants. The advantage we have in representing ourselves is that we can each take a role in speaking our truth in the courtroom unfiltered through the language of a professional attorney. Jeffrey Shapiro was the prosecuting attorney for the government.
The trial turned into a mockery of justice. We were acquitted of the charge of disorderly conduct and found guilty of the charge of unlawful assembly. About half of the defendants will be appealing the decision.
The circus began with the government’s first and only witness, Officer Sherri McDonald with the US Capitol Police. We were not individually and positively identified as the individuals who were in the crypt of the US Capitol that day. The case should have been lost on this mistake by the prosecution alone.
During our defense, we had about seven witnesses on the stand. They testified that it is our right to be in the US Capitol, professing our First Amendment right to freedom of speech and freedom to assemble. Other witnesses testified to using international law as our motivation for doing this action. The war and occupation of Iraq is illegal under international and US law, and we had the right and the responsibility to go to the US Capitol and speak out against the war and occupation. The United States government has broken a number of treaties by invading Iraq including the UN Charter, the Nuremburg Principles, and the Geneva Conventions. All witnesses talked about the horrors of the war and occupation, the incredible human suffering.
The defendants were shocked during Mr. Shapiro’s closing statement when he stated that it was our intent to act unlawfully, and we were even more dismayed when he said that what we did, wearing the blood spattered shirts and falling to the ground, carrying a banner that said “Rivers of Blood Start Here” was obscene, could be disturbing to tourists in the crypt, and could incite violence. This was inconceivable to us in light of the government’s waging of an illegal war where one million innocent people have died. It is the war that is obscene, not us. Mr. Shapiro was very insulting, stating at one point during the closing that, “Dr. King, unlike the defendants in this courtroom, was willing to accept the consequences of his actions.”
After a short deliberation, Judge Keary found us not guilty of disorderly conduct – loud and boisterous. When she announced the verdict, Mr. Shapiro stood and said that it was a general disorderly conduct, not disorderly – loud and boisterous that we were charged with. After a discussion, it was discovered that though Judge Keary was under the impression that all defendants were charged the same, they were not. We were appalled that this information would be discovered after the verdict was read, and that Judge Keary would engage in a conversation with the prosecutor about this at this point in the proceedings. This discovery was just one example of the careless attention to detail on the side of the government. Finally Judge Keary agreed that the acquittal for disorderly conduct would hold.
We were found guilty of unlawful assembly. According to the judge, this verdict was based on two findings. First, we were blocking a passageway. Second, Judge Keary asserted that what we did threatened a breach of the peace. We were stunned by this ruling. During the defense testimony witnesses discussed that many people who saw our action were supportive of what we were doing. In particular a visiting school group was very interested, and defendants heard the teacher tell the students that what we were doing was democracy in action. However, Judge Keary asserted that what we did could cause a reaction of violence on the part of others who came upon our action.
This ruling is incredibly troubling to us, the defendants. What does this mean for freedom of speech? How can this ruling be extended to squelch any form of dissent if there is a possibility that others might not agree? If you extend this ruling, individuals could be arrested for wearing a t-shirt with a political statement because it might illicit a violent reaction from someone who sees it. There seem to be some very far-reaching and chilling implications to this ruling.
For sentencing we were divided into 3 groups based on number of prior arrests. The sentences were unnecessarily harsh and meant to deter people from practicing their right to dissent. We all got from 7-10 days of a suspended jail sentence, 6 months unsupervised probation, and from $50-$100 to be paid to a victims of violent crime fund.
What we were doing there that day was an example of democracy in action. The police did not have to arrest us as we were peacefully expressing our First Amendment Rights. We are people of conscience going to the US Capitol, not to break the law, but to uphold the law, not to breech the peace, but to cry out for peace. We accept the consequences of our actions, because we know in our hearts that what we are doing is right. We will not be deterred by this. We will be back and take the necessary risks as we continue to speak out against the atrocious crimes of our government.
But we need many more people to join us in fighting the corruption of our government. We need many more people willing to follow the lessons that we learned from Gandhi and Martin Luther King. On Dr. King’s birthday, let us honor him by committing ourselves to using nonviolence in our struggle for peace and justice in the world. Let us make the difficult choices and come together across the country to speak out against the crimes of our government. As Dr. King said, “The choice is ours, and though we might prefer it otherwise we must choose in this crucial moment of human history.” For information on joining us go to
http://www.iraqpledge.org/If you are interested in contacting Joy, pm me.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
