Last week a judge for the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago said that eavesdropping legislation, long used by police and their allies to target those who attempted to document their actions, “likely violates” the First Amendment and ordered that authorities be banned from enforcing it.
As Harvey Grossman, legal director of the ACLU noted:
In order to make the rights of free expression and petition effective, individuals and organizations must be able to freely gather and record information about the conduct of government and their agents – especially the police
This ruling couldn’t be more-timely, considering the upcoming NATO summit in Chicago and the recent passing of Chris Drew, who, along with Michael Allison and Tiawanda Moore, was among the most vocal of individuals pushing back against the unjust legislation.
That doesn’t mean those who film police in Illinois (ranked one of the least-free states) will be free from harassment – as readers of CopBlock know it’s not uncommon for someone wearing a badge to levy ridiculous threats on another person in an attempt to deter them from pointing-out claimed double-standards. But the ruling does mean that the implicit threat of being caged for years simply for filming no longer exists. And that’s a step in the right direction.
The ruling in Illinois is part of a larger trend is toward greater transparency.
Massachussets
In August of 2011 the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals overturned draconian wiretapping legislation that had targeted people like Simon Glik and myself and colleague Ademo Freeman. That ruling essentially communicated that public officials (including police) have no expectation of privacy in the course of their duties.
Maryland
In September of 2010 a judge threw-out a felony wiretapping charge against Anthony Graber, noting thatrecording public events is protected under the First Amendment. Graber had been targeted after posting to YouTube a video of his interaction with Maryland State Police employee Joseph D. Uhler.
For more, check out CopBlock’s War on Cameras Map & the related links above
PSOSGT, a frequent commenter on CopBlock.org, submitted the following as a guest post. He didn’t think it would be published but after reading it I thought it would make a good blog, including my responses to his statements. PSOSGT’s statements are block quoted.
I realize this isn’t going to be posted, but I think these two stories shed SOME light as to why police don’t like people behind them, filming or just watching, while dealing someone else. Yes, we use the tired saying of “officer safety” but these are two examples that happened over 2 days that show why police get “jumpy” at times when people walk up to traffic stops, or any other investigation.
Cops can’t read minds. We don’t know if your going to talk, film, watch, or pull out a gun.
Sergeant David Enzbrenner was shot and killed in an unprovoked attack while assisting a code enforcement officer serve a nuisance order at a home near the intersection of 12th. and Division Streets shortly after 4:00 pm.
A person unrelated to the order suddenly approached and opened fire without warning, killing Sergeant Enzbrenner. The man then committed suicide. It is believed the man held a grudge against law enforcement officers because his father was serving a life sentence without parole in Louisiana.
Ah, it says that, “a person unrelated to the order suddenly approached and opened fire.” There was no preventing this, nor is there any one reason as to why this happened, other than some guy wanted to kill this guy. There was no camera involved in this case and a number of things can be distractions, so where do you draw the line? Or why even draw a line? If filming officers makes their job more dangerous then I suggest they stop forcing people to pay their salaries.
Officer Deriek Crouse was shot and killed while making a traffic stop in the parking lot of the university’s Cassell Coliseum, near McComas Hall, at approximately 12:15 pm.
At some point during the stop, a suspect unrelated to the traffic stop approached his unmarked car and shot him once in the head as he sat in his vehicle. The suspect fled on foot to a nearby location on campus and changed clothes. He was located in the university’s I-Lot approximately 45 minutes after the shooting and committed suicide as a Montgomery County deputy attempted to contact him
Again, this seems to be a predetermined event. Maybe this officer was corrupt? Maybe he was in the wrong place at the wrong time? Maybe, just maybe, this was a good officer who paid the ultimate price for another’s mistake. Officers who die in the line of duty are honored – parade and all – yet when officers kill someone the deceased are criminalized.
Neither of these examples prove PSOSGT’s point, that officer need to be wary of people filming. For one, both officers were preoccupied with enforcing some sort of victimless crime – code enforcement and traffic stop – which could be part of the reason for such hate towards LEO’s. Second, if someone had been filming they would have caught these murders on video and could have helped hold those responsible. In case it wasn’t justified, like when cops kill innocent people for being at the wrong place at the wrong time.
PSOSGT goes on to say,
On a personal level, and I’ve said it before. Showing only 1 side to the story, without context isn’t going to win you any favors, or bonus points with people if you truly want to change how police conduct business.
Everyone has a bias, no matter what they say. It’s natural. If there is a bias, and we show one side of policing, I think it’s obvious by the name – CopBlock.org. Atleast we don’t tell you this is the “No Spin Zone” while we jam our beliefs down your throat. Also, I encourage anyone to look at the other side of the coin, watch COPS, visit PoliceOne.com and research as much as you can about police.
How many LEO’s have ever thought about starting their own police service, without the government’s permission, that actually protects people? Are any officers out there sick of the politics involved with their jobs? Forced to do things they don’t like, told what laws/actions to arrest people for? Wouldn’t it be great to sit at home – or do routine visits to costumers – and wait for someone who actually needs help to call you? Have you ever thought of working for yourself, rather than the man?
I agree with anyone who looks at a call, video, report, or cops actions and says, “that’s fucked up” or disagree with what happened. It’s common. But the vast majority of people out there have NO IDEA what or why an officer acted or reacted in any given situation. I think it’s just as important to see what is put INTO law enforcement, that the result of an officer doing his/her job.
I think alot of us do see what’s put into law enforcement… law, which is simply words on paper that I may or may not agree with and enforce, which means if I don’t like it I’ll be punished. So, enforcement is what happens to those who don’t agree with the laws. And an officer’s job isn’t about what they believe but enforcing laws, even ones they know are bad/unconstitutional.
What do you think? Do cameras distract officers? Were these good examples to back that claim? Are people who aren’t police officers less creditable when discussing police issues? Would you hire a private company to provide you protection services if offered (instead of paying taxes to your local department)?
Our friends at Flex Your Rights made a timeline that depicted “A recent history of notable arrests and litigants whose court cases are poised to unravel unjust wiretapping laws.”
It includes many incidents of which you’re likely already aware, and some that might be new. And though the exact circumstances in each situation differed significantly – from cash settlements to those wronged (such as Antonio Musumeci) to murder (such as Oscar Grant) – the unifying thread was simple: that no one has extra rights.
The surest way to ensure there are no more Oscar Grant’s or even folks like Ademo and myself who spent a night in jail and over a year in and out of courtroom legal land, is for each of us to stop granting authority to strangers simply because it’s claimed. Stop acting as if those wearing badges have extra rights – they don’t. You know this. Don’t be afraid. If you see them doing something wrong for you or me, call them out, record and share. Failure to do so at every opportunity means the double-standards only become more entrenched and harmful.
This is even more true since individuals who wear badges purport to serve you yet in true hypocritical fashion, they first steal your money, and if you question them or attempt to hold them accountable, some resort to the only tool in their arsenal: force. That is the epitome of poor service. And it won’t cease until the entire monopolistic framework erodes as we each individually decide to withdraw our consent and look to other, consensual solutions.
The Chesterton Tribune reports that the Indiana House approved the “Right to Resist” bill by a vote of 74-24. The bill would protect residents of Indiana under the states self-defense law if they believe force is necessary to protect them from unlawful actions by a police officer.
However the bill does not give this privilege to someone who is committing a crime. That change was made after police and prosecutor groups told lawmakers they worried the proposal as previously written would spark more violence toward officers. But stop and apply some critical thinking to that part of the bill and remember how many crimes there are on the books and how often people are accused of bullshit crimes during police encounters.
This kinda leaves it wide open to still let officers get away with illegal acts. All they have to do is charge with with the favorite “disorderly conduct” or “resisting arrest.” If this bill passes, would Pete Eyre then be allowed to have used force against the officers who drug him from the court for wearing a hat? He was never charged with any crimes, but with a law like this in place, I have reasonable suspicion to believe he would have been in order to say he was not justified in using force, even though I know Pete never would as he is an incredibly peaceful person as you can see in the video.
What about the bullshit crime of contempt of court, the crime Ademo was charged with when speaking his mind at the video arraignment of Pete after his arrest? Can’t resist if you’re committing a crime? Well you’re always committing a crime, whether you know it or not, the average person commits 3 felonies a day. I’ve probably committed 10 crimes just writing this article.
This is why I’m not too excited about this bill like most people are. It’s mostly posturing when you really break it down. I was excited at first, thinking freedom had scored a win in Indiana, then I saw the comments by State Rep. Ed Delaney
Rep. Ed DeLaney, D-Indianapolis, said the Supreme Court had drawn a “bright line” protecting police and that the public can contest illegal police actions in court or seek to have rogue officers disciplined.
“I believe this goes much too far and is capable of being misunderstood,” DeLaney said.
It’s all about protecting police, the State of Indiana doesn’t care about your rights against police. Just do a quick Google search on court cases where officers are accused of committing crimes and you will see how much advantage they have, mostly getting paid vacations or temp desk jobs. Ed is just regurgitating the same bullshit about suing cops in court, which never works.
Just check out this story from St. Louis, where out of 117 related police shootings in the last 5 years, all but 4 times the officers were cleared of any wrongdoing. I could write forever on those types of instances, but instead just search “paid vacation” on our site and you will see what I am talking about.
One State Rep. who is also a former cop, is against this bill.
Democratic Rep. Linda Lawson of Hammond, a former police officer, told House members they shouldn’t back a measure that could lead to an “open season” by criminals against officers who are willing to sacrifice their lives to protect the public.
Open season? Fuck Linda Lawson, does she ever look at it from the opposite side? She’s worried about citizens being able to use force against cops if they think their actions are illegal? What about the motherfucking police having the right to use force on citizens they think are doing something illegal? Does that not declare “open season” on the people you claim to represent?
Does Linda really think people are that bad? That if given the right to use force against an officer illegally aggressing against them we would just start beating the shit out of police and murdering them at will? This is what cops do all the time.
This cop has the right to use force, up to lethal force, if he thinks someone is doing something illegal. Is this “open season” on citizens? The answer is yes. And since this is a change to the status quo, the cops predictibly are speaking out, using the only thing they have in their arsenal, fear.
“We believe people have the right to be secure in their homes,” said Hendricks County Sheriff Dave Galloway. “But the people who hear about this law are going to think it’s okay to kill a law enforcement officer. What you and I think is ‘reasonable’ isn’t the same as somebody high on meth. They’re going to shoot first, and ask questions later.”
AAAAAHHHHHH! DRUG USERS! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Maybe if you left peaceful people alone, like a lot of drug users are, you wouldn’t have to worry about them shooting you.
It’s that phrase, “if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary” that alarms bill opponents.
“That makes everybody a lawyer,” said Terre Haute Police Chief John Plasse.
And what is wrong with everyone being able to interpret the law? Why should only people with proper government permission be able to interpret this? Alot of cops are freaking out, what they forget, whether it be purposely or not, is that the courts routinely side with the badge. It’s the reason I am subdued in my excitement over this. How often do you even see a police do something clearly illegal, and the courts or their superiors agree with the populace? How often does a court come out and actually say a policeman’s actions are illegal? Sure it happens, but not very often.
So why the outrage from police? Alot of them are crying out “You do not resist a police officer. Just do what we say and everything will be fine” Which asks the question, who is really the master and who is really the servant? If we can get in serious trouble for resisting demands from servants, are they really servants, are they really working for us?
They want you to believe that people are inherently evil, which is completely false. Just look at the background of mass murderers and you will see all the terrible things that happened to them in their childhood. If people are inherently evil, it would not take so many terrible things happening to them to turn them into horrible people?
We all know that if someone breaks into your home and brandishes a weapon you will not be tried for murder if you shoot back. But if it is a cop entering your home, whether they are doing it legally or not, why are they worried about resistance?
The Indiana Supreme Court said you have no right to resist, a ruling brought forth because a Evansville man told a cop he could not enter his house when he responded to a domestic dispute call and pushed the officer away from his door.
Even though I only believe this bill is nothing more than posturing and will not cause a huge upswing in murders of police officers, like the cops are claiming will happen, take a look at past judges ruling on the right to resist unlawful arrest and remember police officers have sworn to uphold the law (although we know it’s a joke)
“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer’s life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed.”
“An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without affidavit, or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction, and one who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. lf the arresting officer is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will be no more than an involuntary manslaughter.” Housh v. People, 75 111. 491; reaffirmed and quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan. 245; Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau, 241 P. 2d 447; State v. Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.
“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.
“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.
“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).
“Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).
“One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).
“Story affirmed the right of self-defense by persons held illegally. In his own writings, he had admitted that ‘a situation could arise in which the checks-and-balances principle ceased to work and the various branches of government concurred in a gross usurpation.’ There would be no usual remedy by changing the law or passing an amendment to the Constitution, should the oppressed party be a minority. Story concluded, ‘If there be any remedy at all … it is a remedy never provided for by human institutions.’ That was the ‘ultimate right of all human beings in extreme cases to resist oppression, and to apply force against ruinous injustice.’” (From Mutiny on the Amistad by Howard Jones, Oxford University Press, 1987, an account of the reading of the decision in the case by Justice Joseph Story of the Supreme Court.
As for grounds for arrest: “The carrying of arms in a quiet, peaceable, and orderly manner, concealed on or about the person, is not a breach of the peace. Nor does such an act of itself, lead to a breach of the peace.” (Wharton’s Criminal and Civil Procedure, 12th Ed., Vol.2: Judy v. Lashley, 5 W. Va. 628, 41 S.E. 197)
The bill will now go back before the Indiana Senate in an attempt to have both chambers agree on the same bill. While we wait, remember to keep your head up, remain peaceful, and for gods sake…..
Tomorrow (Friday, March 2nd) Ademo and I will do our fourth weekly update, which we decided to call our “CopBlock.org’s APB (Ademo/Pete Bulletin, since we share updates, solicit input and seek collaboration.
We’ll be live from 4:00-4:30pm EST via Livestream.com/CopBlock. It’ll feed to the embeded video below. Join us for the conversation.
Livestream has chat functionality or you can leave a comment here if you can’t join us live. If you can’t catch it live the video will be housed at Livestream.com/CopBlock
February 2nd, 2012 Pete & Ademo of CopBlock to Livestream this Friday
“If you have Internet access this Friday, Feb. 3rd join me and Ademo for a 30min conversation starting at 4pm. We plan to do this weekly.”
Things have changed quite a bit in the almost two years since CopBlock.org was founded by Ademo in Wisconsin. As we aim for transparency, just wanted to share a bit about our continued efforts to improve the site.
Our end-goal is to have an informative yet easy to navigate site to better-advance our mission: police accountability, education of individual rights and the dissemination of effective tactics to utilize while filming police.
Hopefully one day the site won’t be needed. But today it is, more than ever. Changes are sorted below by “back-end” and “front-end”
Whether you’ve followed Cop Block since the beginning or are a first-time visitor, what suggestions do you have on how we can do things better? Let us know
March, 2010
December, 2010
April, 2011
January, 2012
Back-end changes:
You might have had problems accessing CopBlock.org in the past couple months thanks to DoS attacks. No longer. Hopefully:)
Liberty Web Alliance led a core group of tech-savvy folks to migrate the site, and the rest of the LWA stable, to a new server housed at Steadfast Networks (Duel core Sandy Bridge). We’re also using FreeBSD and cPanel/WHM.
The team is also hardening the site and making some other tweaks to keep information free and accessible. If you have skills in the area and want to collaborate or be a resource going forward let us know
added a graphic to bring attention to the threats levied at Ademo from persons in Manchester, NH for his belief that public officials are ‘on the job, on the record’
added a widget to display the last dozen posts on CopBlock.org
Again, if you have thoughts on how we could do things better at CopBlock.org let us know. Or even better, join us! We’re a decentralized organization. You’re able and encouraged to use whatever content we create. If you have ideas or want to collaborate let us know. We’re in this together.
If you'd like a CopBlock.org Power Post - as seen above - contact us.
Back in 2010, on a visit to the NH Attorney Genital’s office, we met “investigator” Dick Tracy. More recently, Copblock’s Ademo and I were in the area so we dropped in again with some more questions, this time meeting “investigator” James Brown. Neither man was interested in speaking on the record and Brown attempted to intimidate us into not recording. We did not stop. Here’s what happened:
Remember, it is supposed to be your right to record government bureaucrats in public places. Though, we know they don’t care about what your rights are, so there’s always a chance you could be aggressed against and caged. Sometimes it can be scary when they threaten you, but if you have backup also willing to not back down, your odds of walking away without being caged increase.
Recently I was found guilty in my Chalking 8 trial, while highlighting those bogus charges we (Pete and I) met Frank and Mike, who took this video of Manchester Police Officer Murphy. The video went viral and received attention from several news outlets. Instead of taking a serious look at the actions caught on tape the city went into defense mode.
The Police, school and local government officials sought to criminalize Frank, Mike and myself. They expelled Frank from school, charged Mike as an adult (over a teenage fight) and charged me with three counts of wiretapping. Crimes the state says justifies caging me, at your expense, for 21 years.
I’ve been through this before in Greenfield, MA and am confident I can present my case, logically. The problem I face in Manchester that I didn’t have in Greenfield is the personal vendetta those in Manchester seem to have for me. After all, I was given the max sentence (with 10 months of it stayed for 2 years good behavior) for ‘resisting’ my arrest.
With that in mind I’ve thought long and hard about how I’d like to tackle this case. I’ve done all the homework, reading up on New Hampshire’s wiretapping law, talking with lawyers, brainstorming ideas with fellow activist and more and it’s come down to one thing, funding. Which is why I made this video asking for your help.
As stated in the video, I think a lawyer would be beneficial to ensure I have fair pre-trial hearings and ‘proper’ (in their eyes) procedure during trial. Considering this will be an expectation of privacy trial – and that public officials have none – it will be more difficult that my Greenfield trial. Yet, a win here could do wonders for activists in the “Shire” attempting to change coercive government actions.
That being said, I also know, and appreciate, the offensive tactic as well and when done properly, is mightier than the current justice system. In terms of risk, I end up taking more with this tactic, as these actions will be done outside the court room. The best part of this strategy is that the actions the government is trying to distract you from – excessive force, deletion of evidence and criminalization of those who question government – will be front and center. As this issue goes further back than just one phone call, the Manchester police have gotten away with murder (literally) for a while now.
Regardless of how this fund raiser goes, I’ll be in court, speaking the truth and defending my position on filming, recording and monitoring public officials. I would greatly appreciate you donating to either cause as it would help me (and other activists) further the message of police accountability. You can also buy CopBlock.org swag, which help funds our CopBlock activities, or contact me for video intro/outro’s and power post. For those unable to donate, sharing CopBlock.org content and social networks is just as good as FRN’s and I need/appreciate your support as well.
On December 21st, 2011 Bob Tebo, a bailiff at Cheshire Co. superior court in Keene, NH aggressively arrested two individuals who chose to remain seated when a man wearing a black robe entered the room. One of the two arrested was dragged across the courtroom floor by his handcuffs.
As cameras are “banned” from supposedly “pubic hearings” per a order signed order from Edwin Kelly, the sole footage of this latest example of double-standards is possessed by the bailiffs and those employed at the Cheshire Co. Sheriff’s Department (which has their office in the court building).
Kelly has stonewalled inquiries that seek to uncover his motivations for implementing the draconian camera ban. And despite requests, the footage from Tebo’s latest incident has yet to be provided and complaints made against him remain “under investigation.” It’s probably not a stretch to guess that that’ll go no where. And why would it? When there’s no competition there’s no reason to even attempt good “customer service.”
Instead of being thankful and acting on information provided by those concerned about double-standards, “public officials” have remained standoffish. They haven’t just refused to converse about the situation but have actively compounded the harm by levying additional threats of arrest, should those commanded not move off public property, most-recently going so far as to “ban” one person from the public parking lot without explanation.
It’s as if the legal land of the courtroom spilled outside. These sorts of incidents will not end until authority is no longer granted to Tebo and his colleagues who have acted and continue to act in the wrong.
If you'd like a CopBlock.org Power Post - as seen above - contact us.
Much love to JJ Schlessinger who’s latest video Judge Burke Victim Reelinspired me to cut-up this compilation of clear unaccountability by “public officials” at superior court.
Several months ago Ademo Freeman was arrested outside Keene District Court in Keene, New Hampshire. Initially there was a lot of mystery surrounding the circumstances and what he did to get arrested. Early reports indicated that he had simply been asking Judge Burke some questions and the idea that asking questions could get you thrown in jail was too absurd to accept.
Ademo was released roughly two weeks later and his video of the incident was available shortly thereafter. After watching the video and witnessing myself Judge Burke’s abuse of power I felt inspired to cut up a compilation video of the people who have been victimized by Burke. Ademo was literally caged for asking questions. No foul language or threats were heard from Ademo, only three questions.
This is not a complete compilation by any means.
This video contains the arrests of the following individuals:
Ian Freeman
Dave Ridley
Pete Eyre
Beau Davis
Ademo Freeman
Derrick J Freeman
—————————————————
I was arrested on January 24th, 2011 and held for half a week. A week after that I wrote and saved (but never published) a post I titled “Pete’s Story.” Seems pretty fitting to share it here:
The below is my account of what happened two weeks ago when I was sitting in Keene district court and the following days. It’s pretty thorough, but if you have specific questions that aren’t addressed let me know.
BACKGROUND
Just before 10am on Monday, January 24th, Ademo, Ethan Lee Vita and I braved the subzero temperature and walked to Keene district court. We did a Qik update on the way. We went inside and up the steps to the second floor, where a few people were milling around, including two bailiffs doing security detail.
Lance Walton, one of the two bailiffs and the administrator of the court, spotted me and told me to take off my hood (I had my hat on with my hood over it). I told him I was cold but after his second request I pulled it down, figuring it’s not worth the fight. I was there to support my friends, not deal with petty bs. Lance wanded and patted me down and looked inside my hat. He gave the all clear. I put my hat back on and strolled down the hallway into court.
ARREST
I walked toward an empty seat. Before I had even sat down another bailiff – Pete Macy – told me to remove my hat. “Why?” I asked. He told me it was policy of the court. I told him that I hadn’t signed the policy and that I wasn’t hurting anyone. He reached for my hat and I leaned back and advised him not to touch my property. My voice was calm and my hands were in the pocket on the front of my hoodie staying warm – I did nothing aggressive.
Moments later Keene police officer James Cemorelis barked “You’re out of here!” and yanked me to the ground. My friends whipped out their cameras and started recording. For no reason, Keene police officer Matt Griffon, who had been sitting in the front row, put his knee at the base of my neck as he assisted Cemorelis in the handcuffing (read a letter sent to Cemorelis about his actions). I tried to express just how uncalled for was the treatment I was receiving. I was roughly carried out of the room, down the hall and into another room. Another bailiff, apparently undeterred by the “Do Not Block Door” sign bolted to the door, stood in front of the door in an attempt to block Ademo from filming the scene through the door’s narrow vertical window.
From the ground, I asked the officers why they felt the need to utilize such a level of force. I glanced up and posed a question specifically to Griffon (his name was embroidered onto his shirt). Apparently he didn’t want to have a conversation. Griffon and police officer Chris Simonds (?) carried me toward the back staircase. As we approached, one of my captors commented, “I hope you don’t fall on your head”. I asked why, if that risk exists, would they choose to transport me – a peaceful person – in such a manner. Didn’t seem worth the risk…
Outside I was set on the ground in the snow as a cruiser door was opened. My bud JJ was there, camera in hand. I was shoved across the police crusier’s plastic molded bench seat and transported to the Cheshire County Jail.
I learned later that minutes after I was arrested someone else present in the same room donned a hat. Yet for some reason they received completely different treatment – some claim that was due to their different attire.
TRANSIT I asked Simonds if he felt the level of force used against me was just. He responded in the affirmative since that was the law – he had his orders. I asked if he would use deadly force against me for similar allegations. He said that was ridiculous. “Well what if you were so ordered?” I asked. “Of course not” he responded. “So, at what point between the force you used against me today and shooting me would you say “No!”? At what point would you stand up and do what’s right?” He didn’t respond.
Soon we pulled into the sally port at the jail. I could hear men talking. The door by my feet opened. I was told to sit up and get out. I explained that though I would not resist, I would not assist in my caging since it was I who had been victimized. I was dragged out feet first, carried inside and placed on the floor of the closest cell in the booking area. My hands were still handcuffed behind my back. I remember looking to my right, seeing a forest of black combat boots and thinking “There is no accountability for these guys. They could just beat the hell out of me right now and claim that I was aggressive.”
My handcuffs were removed and the gang of grown men yanked off my hoodie and workout pants. The cell door slammed shut. I lay on my stomach on the cold concrete floor in my thin gym shorts, t-shirt and socks, replaying the previous 30-minutes over and over in my head, trying to figure out how someone could possibly try to justify the treatment I had endured by “public servants”.
BOOKING I was asked to provide my information for processing. Why would I willingly provide my private information to strangers who kept me caged? I was asked what name I wanted to go by in their system. I responded, “I just want to be free to go man. I haven’t hurt anybody.” “Ok”, came the response, “Free to go man” is your name. I didn’t laugh.
After a while I sat up and faced those who carried me into the cell. I figured that if I were out of sight my captors could more-easily put me out of their mind, thus allowing them to belittle or rationalize the force they used against me.
At 1pm, 4:30pm, 6:15pm, 8:15pm and 10:45pm correction officers approached my cell and pressured me to process. The 3/4″ Global Security Glazing glass muffled our communication. During later visits the correction officers opened the door to talk with me (presumably it took half a day for these folks to realize that I was not violent).
My cage was constructed of institution-white cinder blocks, each about 18″ long and 8″ tall, making the interior dimensions of my cell about 9′ 9″ deep, 8′ 3″ wide and 7′ 4″ tall. The front wall facing the elevated booking area was primarily made of glass and the heavy steel door. When it was light out I could catch glimpses of the stars and stripes flying outside. Land of the free, huh? A narrow elevated slab of concrete along one wall, painted red, served as the bed. There was a steel comode/sink with three buttons. One flushed the commode. The other two both ran cold water. I was told if I were thirsty the sink faucets doubled as a “bubbler”.
At one point I noticed a gentleman talking with the correctional officers manning the front desk. He stuck out to me because in lieu of a silly costume he wore slacks, a black turtleneck and a light blazer. I later learned he was Rick Van Wickler – the superintendent of the facility.
After explaining to one correction officer who stopped by my cell – J. Richard – that I hadn’t harmed anyone and that my caging only compounded and exacerbated the harm already inflicted, she noted that what I had done was a “victimless crime”. I followed-up on her statement by noting that when arbitrary man-made legislation conflicts with natural law one must side with the latter. She didn’t agree. She was just doing her job after all.
No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible. – Stanislaw J. Lec
Night came. It was cold. I sat on the floor, legs pulled to my chest with my t-shirt over my knees and my head tucked inside to maximize warmth. I was still damn cold. I wrapped toilet paper around my exposed legs (I learned this tactic from Ademo, who turned himself into a toilet paper mummy when being held in a cold cell in Las Vegas earlier in the year). My feet, with layers of toilet paper under white ankle socks, looked like bloated marshmallows. And they were happier. The heat-sapping concrete now had a couple of layers of toilet paper to get through. Sleep came in short 30min snatches.
After a long, uncomfortable night, I was asked to process. I declined. Hours passed.
ARRAIGNMENT M. Willis asked if I wanted to speak with the judge. “Sure”, I said, “but I’m going to tell him the same thing I’ve been telling you” – that I haven’t hurt anyone.
I was escorted through the facility and instructed to sit in a chair while the video link connected with Keene district court. Initially there was a technical delay. I largely remained silent, not too keen to be buddy-buddy with someone willing to place and keep peaceful people in cages against their will. He was adamant that his policy, which does not investigate whether someone deserves to be caged, is best.
Why would someone unthinkingly take possession of another human being and place them in a cage without having more information? As I told Willis, the system does not result in “checks and balances” but unaccountability. Every individual involved – legislators, bailiffs, cops, correction officers, judges – claims that they personally are not to blame for your predicament but that you can fix it if only you talk to someone else.
Once the video link was made, Burke explained that he needed two things from me – 1) to identify and 2) for me to indicate whether I planned to apply for counsel. “Well, frankly,” I noted, “what I’d like to see is for the bailiff to apologize to me for using aggressive force” but Burke cut me short.
Burke claimed that I was “presumed innocent,” causing someone in the audience out of my field of vision to laugh. Burke ordered them removed.
I told Burke that they day prior I felt like the victim (i.e. tackled, carried, caged). Then Ademo spoke his mind for about 40-seconds (~4:00), ending with: “One of your men assaulted him! Assaulted him!” and “Get a life!”
Burke wasn’t too fond of what he heard and ordered those doing his bidding to handcuff Ademo and remove him from the room (note that Ademo had been walking out of the room on his own accord, and was only feet from the door). He was brought across my field of vision and into the room to Burke’s left.
Burke told me it was “up to me” to comply to gain my freedom. I told him that he had “the ability to throw this out and say there shouldn’t be a charge. I didn’t hurt anybody.” Burke said “Ok. Alright. I guess we’re not going to get anywhere. Thank you” and left.
Willis led me back to my cage, informing me not to breath deeply when in the lobby area as his colleagues had had to “deploy mace”. Against a lady.
I worried about Ademo. I hoped they cut him loose. I watched the sliding door that opened into the booking area, hopeful that I wouldn’t see him.
I was told that I was going to be moved since I’d reached the 24-hour-maximum stay in booking.
Then in came Ademo carried by a group of men wearing badges. We exchanged glances. He was placed on the floor of a cell two away from mine. He held up six digits and mouthed/yelled that he had been given a 60-day sentence. “What the hell!?” was all I could say as I was being led away.
I was told that I had to first take a shower. I stripped, lifted up my scrotum and spread my cheeks for Willis. Then I took a quick shower (which helped to warm me up) and put on jail duds. Fun fun. As I was led to my new cage other inmates looking through the window on their doors yelled down to my captor, “What’d he do?” Why is he going in there?”- the “there” being segregation.
SEGREGATION I was told I would kept in the cage for 23-hours a day. I eyed the thin, plastic-covered mattress sitting up on the metal frame bed bolted to the wall. I laid down. A short time later a correctional officer brought me blankets and some toiletries. I turned myself into a human burrito and tried to sleep.
I didn’t eat. I was told that if I continued not to eat I’d end up in a hospital being fed via an IV. Days later I questioned my stance – if I wasn’t eating because I didn’t want to burden taxpayers wouldn’t ending-up in a hospital defeat that principle? Hospital tends to be damn spendy after all…
I chewed on the few options that I had any control over.
I called Lance. It was around 11am. I told him about my last 24-hours and he updated me on the activity happening on the outside, specifically mentioning the Chipin George Donnelly created to help pay for a press release distribution.
Correctional officers peered through the window in my cage door on their rounds (hourly?), sometimes shining a flashlight my way. During mealtimes I was offered food. I declined.
On Wednesday Van Wickler stopped by my cage in the early afternoon and asked if I would like to speak with my mom. “Of course!” I responded. We walked to the phone, Van Wickler read her number while I dialed, then he left. It was good to talk with her.
Over the two-and-a-half days I was in segregation Van Wickler visited my cell about five times for a total of 45-60-minutes. He’s pressured me to process. He brought two copies of documents that outlined the information that I’d be required to share if I were to process.
During one visit Van Wickler asked his colleague to leave us so he could talk with me alone. He asked if I thought Burke was concerned with my actions in the jail and answered his own question with a single “No.” And, despite agreeing with me that the force that had been used in my situation was uncalled for he was unwilling to let me out. He had keys to the facility. He could act on his conscious.
At one point it was communicated to me that Ademo had processed and was going to be released later that evening. I hoped it were true, but doubted it. Like cops, correctional officers lie.
I thought through potential avenues to gain justice. I had lots of time to think and do some internal creative destruction about strategy, tactics, relationships with people, incidents, etc.
On Thursday I wasn’t able to reach Lance when I tried his number. I only remembered three other numbers – Ademo’s, which didn’t help, Allison Gibbs and Ian Freeman. I called Ian as my ultimate goal was to reach Michele Seven to see about getting picked-up if I did process. Ian was more than happy to help and conference called us all together. I informed them of where I was at and learned that M7 had unfortunately slipped a couple of times when in Keene exiting the district court and wasn’t too mobile. Ian offered to grab me so long as he could get an exemption on his no trespass, which stemmed from the insane arrests last year that became known as the Trespass of Twelve.
I decided I could have a bigger impact on the outside. I decided to process.
At one point when in segregation Van Wickler asked me if I knew “Brandon Ross” who he said had claimed to be my lawyer. I noted that Brandon was “a friend” and Van Wickler commented that a case like ours didn’t necessitate multiple lawyers (since Lance Weber had already been communicating with me and Ademo). Later, after I processed, I learned of the work Brandon did behind-the-scenes for us. At one point he had been told by Van Wickler that he’d be able to see me in segregation. Ross made the drive from Concord and waited six hours but was denied access entirely. I was never informed of his visit.
PROCESSING Thanks to lengthy time delays, sub-par “customer service” and accepted bureaucracy, it would be impossible to not know I was interacting with a government agency when processing. I sat in a chair in front of the counter and answered questions posed by Willis. My picture was taken – each side and straight-on. My fingerprints were taken and checked via IAFAS, the FBI’s database. Willis told me my fingerprints would be deleted automatically if they returned no hits. Sure.
I had questions about some of the stipulations on the paperwork Van Wickler had provided me. “Why was the check-box next to: ‘Is ordered not to drive until the defendant’s license or privilege is restored by the Director of Motor Vehicles’ checked?” I asked. “Or why am I to ‘refrain from excessive use of alcohol, and use of a narcotic or controlled substance as defined in RSA 318-B’?” Willis claims to not have known.
The bail commissioner – an angry man named Frank J. Obuchowski arrived. After getting his paperwork and “official” stamp laid out he barked orders at me. I stopped him and asked him why he thought it necessary to speak with such a hostile tone. Another inmate – who was a big dude – turned from watching the TV to us. Obuchowski quieted down some, but before leaving he made a point to tell me that he spoke that way so there was no question what he was communicating.
I asked him about the two check-boxed items. On the paperwork he brought the drivers license stipulation was not checked. He read to me that I could not have any alcohol or controlled substances. I pointed-out that on the form I had it just stated no “excessive” use of alcohol. He looked it over and, on his copy, angrily wrote the word “excessive” above to the sentence. Then I asked him how “excessive” is defined, and who gets to do the defining. He didn’t have an answer.
My arraignment is scheduled for Wednesday, February 9th at 9am. The paperwork threatened me with increased penalties if I were arrested when out on bail. I thought I was innocent until proven guilty. What if I were arrested by another out-of-control cop for a victimless action?
Obuchowski told me I owed him $40. Van Wickler, who had been hovering around the lobby through this proceeding, had earlier told me when I brought up that the fee was the man’s “bread and butter”. He indicated that it didn’t have to be paid. Sounds good to me. I told Obuchowski that I didn’t have any money (I didn’t), that this fee had not been mentioned earlier and that it was unfair for him and his colleagues to continue to add additional criteria so that I could regain my freedom of movement. He said, “Well who’s picking you up? Maybe they have money.” No dice buddy.
Then Obuchowski told me that I had to go to the Keene Police Department before 4pm (it was 2:30pm). I questioned why this was added? And at who’s direction? No one gave me any information.
Van Wickler called Ian and “granted” an exemption on the no trespass order. Soon he was on-scene and I was out.
In the five or ten minutes I had been waiting Van Wickler told me about how he’d recently declared three Cuban cigars on his flight back from Canada, where he had spoken to parliament about drug policy (Van Wickler is a speaker with Law Enforcement Against Prohibition). He explained that he’d been barred from bringing the cigars across an imaginary line so he gave them to a taxi driver. If one can see the failures of drug prohibition then why not stand against all victimless “crimes”?
FREEDOM As I climbed into Ian’s car he handed me a meal replacement drink Meg Mclain had wanted me to have. Perfecto! I put out a Keene411 to announce my freedom and to see if any friends in the area wanted to join us for a bite at a Mexican place in town. About 16 did, despite the short notice.
After the hugs, conversation and burrito (thanks Heika!) I was reminded at just how many awesome individuals make up this community. It was exactly what I needed.
THOUGHTS
The support Ademo & I have received has been amazing. Thanks so much! It has not only had very real impacts for us but it shows others that we’re here for each other, which may make them more-likely to stand up for what they know is right.
Does it make sense that individuals who have harmed no one end up in cages? Though I can’t authoritatively speak for everyone I think it’s fair to say that we each are standing on principle, despite the threats levied at us, knowing that failure to do so today will make it more difficult tomorrow.
If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.
– Thomas Jefferson
This ruling couldn’t be more-timely, considering the upcoming NATO summit in Chicago and the recent passing of Chris Drew, who, along with Michael Allison and Tiawanda Moore, was among the most vocal of individuals pushing back against the unjust legislation.
Join the forum discussion on this post
