cannabisnews.com: Pickets Ousted -- Who Gave Order?





Pickets Ousted -- Who Gave Order?
Posted by CN Staff on June 29, 2002 at 09:47:17 PT
By Denny Walsh -- Bee Staff Writer
Source: Sacramento Bee 
Questions have been raised about whether federal and local police violated the constitutional rights of protesters near the Sacramento federal courthouse by forcing them to disperse. The action was taken Wednesday when medical marijuana activists handed out pamphlets and held placards during jury selection in the trial of Bryan James Epis. Information disseminated by protesters earlier in the week had already led to the dismissal of 42 prospective jurors by U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr.
Government lawyers in the criminal pot case and Damrell are concerned that a jury selected Wednesday from a new pool will see the pickets critical of federal marijuana prosecutions and the lengthy prison terms that go with them.Someone ordered the protesters had to go. That order, and the question of who issued it, are at the center of the controversy in a trial that has been troubled from the start.Representatives of the Sacramento Police Department and the demonstrators said that officers of the Federal Protective Service -- a branch of the General Services Administration, which maintains federal buildings -- told them the dispersal was ordered by Damrell.The judge denied having done so from the bench Thursday, which raises the specter of the officers acting without authority."It is outrageous and personally offensive to me if any police officer broke up a demonstration by invoking an order of the court that was never given," said Charles Stevens in an interview Friday. Stevens is the former U.S. attorney in Sacramento whose current private practice includes First Amendment litigation."Something like that would cut against everything our system of justice stands for," he said.According to Sacramento Police Capt. Sam Somers, a city officer on the scene was told by FPS officers that the judge had said the demonstrators' actions were a detriment to the trial and that the city officer was needed to help get them off the Fifth Street sidewalk.The city officer asked about a court order, but federal police said there wasn't one. However, they said dispersement was justified by a federal statute, Somers related. The statute was then read to demonstrators, who were told to leave, the captain said."We were basically in a facilitating role, not an enforcement role," Somers said. "The protest was peaceful and cordial. There were no arrests."GSA spokeswoman Esther Timberlake told a different story Friday. She said FPS officers did not threaten arrests, as claimed by the demonstrators, and were not acting at Damrell's direction.Timberlake said a court security officer showed Damrell the medical marijuana pamphlet being passed out by demonstrators and the judge said they could not disseminate it. An FPS officer relayed that to the demonstrators, she said. About 2 p.m. an assistant U.S. attorney brought a copy of the statute to FPS officers and wanted it read to the demonstrators, she added. She was unable to identify the assistant U.S. attorney.As federal officers approached the demonstrators, the Sacramento officer was already shooing them off the sidewalk, Timberlake said.Demonstration leader Aundre Speciale, a board member of the Sacramento chapter of Americans for Safe Access, which supports medical marijuana use, gave this version of Wednesday's events:A court security officer and federal police officer told her roughly 10-member group that the judge would not tolerate dissemination of the medical marijuana material, nor could they orally promote medical marijuana to passers-by.Snipped: Complete Article: http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/3387779p-4418339c.htmlSource: Sacramento Bee (CA)Author: Denny Walsh -- Bee Staff WriterPublished: Saturday, June 29, 2002Copyright: 2002 The Sacramento BeeContact: opinion sacbee.comWebsite: http://www.sacbee.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Medicinal Cannabis Research Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/research.htmMedical Marijuana Trial on Hold http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13247.shtmlChicoan Arrested in Attempt To Sway Jury http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13242.shtmlJurors in Medical Marijuana Case To Be Shieldedhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13241.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #6 posted by dddd on July 01, 2002 at 03:44:57 PT
...BGreen....
.....DOH!....
 
....I've done the same thing myself bunches of times...I was toying with the idea of how to delicately alert you to the reality,,,,but I decided that it would be cruel and unusual to rub it in.......besides,,,I have written the same "note to self",,,over a hundred times!........I think you're probably the best,BG!!..............dddd
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by BGreen on July 01, 2002 at 03:38:00 PT
Note to self
Search Cannabisnews.com FIRST!
LEGAL GLITCH HALTS POT TRIAL
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by BGreen on July 01, 2002 at 03:33:41 PT
Look what i just found
They apparently blew it big time!!!
LEGAL GLITCH HALTS POT TRIAL
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by qqqq on July 01, 2002 at 03:01:45 PT
...DocZombie...EJ.....
..Yes!....your points are true and outstanding!....
 
 
"..      These people trying to suppress this information deserve the full contempt of society."
 
 
 ...The supressors of this info,will never be brought to justice!..It's about as likely as"Kenny Boy" Lay ,ending up in prison!
 
 .."I want to see what Judge Damrell does if indeed he did NOT order this. I got $5.00 that says he will be pissed.
      (Honorably, of course)"
 
 
...we will never know if he is in fact "pissed"....I got 5 bucks that says I'm quite pissed,at what Damrell did in the first place!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by xxdr_zombiexx on June 29, 2002 at 13:49:49 PT
Important Trial
The Feds are hoping to get a precedent setting rulling on this case, I think. It will be fascinating to watch how it unfolds and more affronts to Civil Liberties are observed.Epis had weed...medical weed..He wasnt making the now mass-produced "dirty bomb".How very, very 1984 of them to do this.I want to see what Judge Damrell does if indeed he did NOT order this. I got $5.00 that says he will be pissed. (Honorably, of course)I just made the connection today that he was the Judge who threw out the verdict on the Mexican men who had been kidnapped to work in potfields.It would be pleasant to look up to judges.. but Im a dangerous Idealist...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by E_Johnson on June 29, 2002 at 10:47:59 PT
It should be ilegal to hide the sentence
These people trying to suppress this information deserve the full contempt of society.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment