madmark.myfastforum.org Forum Index madmark.myfastforum.org
Fuck the system!
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

San Diego Civil Disobedients Dismissed

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    madmark.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> Sun-Tues, June 15-17, 2008
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertsing.






Posted:     Post subject:

Back to top
Mark
Site Admin


Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 1052



PostPosted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 5:54 pm    Post subject: San Diego Civil Disobedients Dismissed Reply with quote

San Diego Civil Disobedients Dismissed

Email from the Peace Resource Center:

San Diego Civil Disobedients win victory against trespassing prosecution!

Two members of the San Diego Civil Disobedients (SDCD, www.sdcd.org) Jackie Riekstins and Hal Brody were the only ones prosecuted of the five arrested in U.S. Rep. Susan Davis’ office in Sept. of last year. Vowing to get a pledge from Davis to not vote for further war funding before leaving, the activists settled in for “however long it would take.” They were arrested when they refused to leave after their first day of occupation.

The trial was scheduled for June 3rd, but at the last minute the DA requested a dismissal of the charges. No reason was given. Earlier, the DA had offered to reduce the charges from a misdemeanor to an infraction (a far less serious violation of law) but that offer was rejected by the defendants. They wanted to tell a jury of their peers why it was imperative that their actions were taken.

Eminent constitutional scholar, Marjorie Cohn had agreed to be a witness for the defense, testifying to the international and constitutional illegality of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Her testimony, added to that of the defendants descriptions of the death, suffering, and environmental destruction that these conflicts are producing, would help convince the jury of the “necessity” of the trespass. A “necessity defense” is legally recognized and alleges that although a minor law was violated, a much larger good resulted. (Imagine prosecuting someone for breaking down a door to save people in a burning home.)

SDCD believes that “our house is burning” and encourages others of conscience to use all nonviolent means including the time-honored methods of civil disobedience to convince law-makers to cut off funding and thereby end these conflicts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Site Admin


Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 1052



PostPosted: Sun Jun 15, 2008 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know why they're calling it a victory.

The defendants never got their day in court.

The Congresscriminal went right on voting for war crimes.

Where's the victory?


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    madmark.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> Sun-Tues, June 15-17, 2008 All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum