The 'Friends of Marcia Powell' are autonomous groups and individuals engaging in prisoner outreach, informal advocacy, and organized protest and direct actions in a sustained campaign to: promote prisoner rights and welfare in America; engage the Arizona public in a creative and thoughtful critique of our system of "justice;” deconstruct the prison industrial complex; and dismantle this racist, classist patriarchy...

Retiring "Free Marcia Powell"

As of December 2, 2010 (with occasional exceptions) I'm retiring this blog to direct more of my time and energy into prisoner rights and my other blogs; I just can't do anyone justice when spread so thin. I'll keep the site open so folks can search the archives and use the links, but won't be updating it with new posts. If you're looking for the latest, try Arizona Prison Watch. Most of the pieces posted here were cross-posted to one or both of those sites already.

Thanks for visiting. Peace out - Peg.

Monday, September 6, 2010

Perryville: Resistance Behind Bars


I originally put the following article about Vikki Law's work up awhile ago. In it she discusses both women's resistance in prison and the vision of prison abolition. I thought it was worth putting up again in light of the resistance we saw last week at Perryville.


Families: get this word in to the women of Perryville - Rock On! Some of you have my address - use it or share it, and we'll do whatever we can to support you in there.
------------------------------------


Women's Resistance Behind Bars

Beyond Attica: The Untold Story of Women's Resistance Behind Bars

By Hans Bennett
Alternet
July 21, 2009

As the incarceration rate of U.S. women skyrockets, an important book shines new light on the struggles of women prisoners.

"When I was 15, my friends started going to jail," says Victoria Law, a native New Yorker.

"Chinatown's gangs were recruiting in the high schools in Queens and, faced with the choice of stultifying days learning nothing in overcrowded classrooms or easy money, many of my friends had dropped out to join a gang."

"One by one," Law recalls, "they landed in Rikers Island, an entire island in New York City devoted to pretrial detainment for those who can not afford bail."

Law shares this and other recollections in her new book, Resistance Behind Bars: The Struggles of Incarcerated Women (PM Press). At 16, she herself decided to join a gang, but was arrested for the armed robbery that she committed for her initiation into the gang. "Because it was my first arrest -- and probably because 16-year-old Chinese girls who get straight As in school did not seem particularly menacing -- I was eventually let off with probation," she writes.

Before her release from jail, Law was held in the "Tombs" awaiting arraignment. While the adult women she met there had all been arrested for prostitution, she also met three teenagers arrested for unarmed assault. "Two of the girls were black lesbian lovers. In a scenario that would be repeated 13 years later in the case of the New Jersey Four, they had been out with friends when they encountered a cab driver who had tried to grab one of them. Her friends intervened, the cab driver called the police and the girls were arrested for assault." Law notes that "both of my cellmates were subsequently sent to Rikers Island."

These early experiences, coupled with her later discovery of radical politics, pushed Law "to think about who goes to prison and why." She got involved in several projects to support prisoners, which included helping to start Books Through Bars in New York City, sending free books to prisoners. In college, she "began researching current prisoner organizing and resistance," and upon discovering almost zero documentation of resistance from women prisoners, she began her own documentation and directly contacted women prisoners who were resisting. A college paper became a widely distributed pamphlet, and at the request of several women prisoners she'd corresponded with, Law helped to publish their writings in a zine called Tenacious: Art and Writings from Women in Prison. Law writes that the zine and pamphlet "heightened awareness not only about incarcerated women's issues, but also women's actions to challenge and change the injustices they faced on a daily basis."

"This book is the result of seven and a half years of reading, writing, listening, and supporting women in prison," Law says about Resistance Behind Bars, noting that each chapter in her book "focuses on an issue that women themselves have identified as important." The chapters include topics as diverse as health care, the relationship between mothers and daughters, sexual abuse, education, and resistance among women in immigration detention. Resistance Behind Bars paints a picture of women prisoners resisting a deeply flawed prison system, which Law hopes will help to empower both the women held in cages and those on the outside working to support them.

Who Goes To Prison?

Since 1970, the U.S. prison population has skyrocketed, from 300,000 to over 2.3 million. According to the U.S. Justice Department, this staggering increase has not resulted from a rise in crime. In fact, since 1993, the prison population has increased by over one million, but during this same period, both property offenses and serious violent crime have been steadily declining. The New York Times recently cited a 2008 report by the International Center for Prison Studies at King's College London documenting that the U.S. has more prisoners than any other country. Furthermore, with 751 out of 100,000 people, and one out of every 100 adults in prison or jail, the U.S. also has the highest incarceration rate in the world. With only five percent of the world's population, the U.S. has almost a quarter of the world's prisoners.

While women comprise only nine percent of the U.S. prison population, their numbers have been increasing at a faster rate than men. As Law documents, "between 1990 and 2000, the number of women in prison rose 108 percent, from 44,065 to 93,234. (The male prison population grew 77 percent during that same time period.) By the end of 2006, 112,498 women were behind bars."

Like with male incarceration rates, women behind bars are disproportionately low-income and people of color. Law writes that "only 40 percent of all incarcerated women had been employed full-time before incarceration. Of those, most had held low-paying jobs: a study of women under supervision (prison, jail, parole or probation) found that two-thirds had never held a job that paid more than $6.50 per hour. Approximately 37 percent earned less than $600 per month."

A 2007 Bureau of Justice study documented that 358 of every 100,000 Black women, 152 of every 100,000 Latinas, and 94 of every 100,000 white women are incarcerated. Explaining this racial discrepancy, Law argues that inner-city Black and Latino neighborhoods are disproportionately targeted by law enforcement. She cites a 2005 U.S. Department of Justice study which concluded that Blacks and Latinos are "three times as likely as whites to be searched, arrested, threatened or subdued with force when stopped by the police."
The so-called "War on Drugs" has played a key role in the growth of the U.S. prison population.

Law writes about the impact of New York State's Rockefeller Drug Laws passed in 1973, "which required a sentence of 15 years to life for anyone convicted of selling two ounces or possessing four ounces of a narcotic, regardless of circumstances or prior history. That year, only 400 women were imprisoned in New York State. As of January 1, 2001, there were 3,133. Over 50 percent had been convicted of a drug offense and 20 percent were convicted solely of possession. Other states passed similar laws, causing the number of women imprisoned nationwide for drug offenses to rise 888 percent from 1986 to 1996."

Distinguishing women prisoners from their male counterparts, Law cites a Bureau of Justice study which "found that women were three times more likely than men to have been physically or sexually abused prior to incarceration."

Women Prisoners Don't Resist?

The central thesis of Resistance Behind Bars is truly profound. In clear, non-academic language, Law argues that recent scholarship documenting and radically criticizing the increased incarceration rates and mistreatment of women prisoners "largely ignores what the women themselves do to change or protest these circumstances, thus reinforcing the belief that incarcerated women do not organize." Alongside academia, Law also harshly criticizes radical prison activists, arguing that "just as the civil rights movement of the 1960s and 1970s downplayed the role of women in favor of highlighting male spokesmen and leaders, the prisoners' rights movement has focused and continues to focus on men to speak for the masses."

Law gives honorable mention to two books that documented women's resistance at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility in New York State: Juanita Diaz-Cotto's Gender, Ethnicity, and the State (1996) and the collectively written Breaking the Walls of Silence: AIDS and Women in a New York State Maximum Security Prison (1998). Since these two books "no other book-length work has focused on incarcerated women's activism and resistance," writes Law. As a result, Law argues that women prisoners "lack a commonly known history of resistance. While male prisoners can draw on the examples of George Jackson, the Attica uprising and other well-publicized cases of prisoner activism, incarcerated women remain unaware of precedents relevant to them."

Epitomizing the scholarship that Law criticizes, author Virginia High Brislin wrote that "women inmates themselves have called very little attention to their situations," and "are hardly ever involved in violent encounters with officials (i.e. riots), nor do they initiate litigation as often as do males in prison."

To challenge Brislin's assertion, Law gives numerous examples of women rioting and initiating litigation, including the "August Rebellion" in 1974 at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility in New York State. On July 2, 1974, prisoner Carol Crooks won a lawsuit against prison authorities, with the court "issuing a preliminary injunction, prohibiting the prison from placing women in segregation without 24-hour notice and a hearing of these charges," writes Law. In response, "five male guards beat Crooks and placed her in segregation. Her fellow prisoners protested by holding seven staff members hostage for two and a half hours. However, 'the August Rebellion' is virtually unknown today despite that fact that male state troopers and (male) guards from men's prisons were called to suppress the uprising, resulting in 25 women being injured and 24 women being transferred to Matteawan Complex for the Criminally Insane without the required commitment hearings."

Law also criticizes author Karlene Faith, who acknowledges that women resist, but who wrote that in the 1970s, women prisoners "were not as politicized as the men [prisoners], and they did not engage in the kinds of protest actions that aroused media attention." To challenge Faith's argument, Law cites several rebellions that received significant media attention, including one that the New York Times wrote two stories about. As Law recounts, "in 1975, women at the North Carolina Correctional Center for Women held a sit-down demonstration to demand better medical care, improved counseling services, and the closing of the prison laundry. When prison guards attempted to end the protest by herding the women into the gymnasium and beating them, the women fought back, using volleyball net poles, chunks of concrete and hoe handles to drive the guards out of the prison. Over 100 guards from other prisons were summoned to quell the rebellion."

In light of the many such stories documented in Resistance Behind Bars, Law argues that "instead of claiming that women in prison did not engage in riots and protest actions that captured media attention, scholars and researchers should examine why these acts of organizing fail to attract the same critical and scholarly attention as that given to similar male actions."

Resisting With Media-Activism

In the chapter "Grievances, Lawsuits, and the Power of the Media," Law observes that "gaining media attention often gains quicker results than filing lawsuits." Among the many organizing victories that were significantly aided by media attention, in 1999, Nightline focused on conditions at California's Valley State Prison for Women. Law explains that "after prisoner after prisoner told Nightline anchor Ted Koppel about being given a pelvic exam as 'part of the treatment' for any ailment, including stomach problems or diabetes, Koppel asked the prison's chief medical officer Dr. Anthony DiDomenico, for an explanation."

DiDomenico was apparently so confident that he would not be held accountable for his misconduct, that he answered Koppel by saying "I've heard inmates tell me they would deliberately like to be examined. It's the only male contact they get." After this interview was aired, DiDomenico was reassigned to a desk job, and as of 2001 he had been criminally indicted, along with a second doctor.

Demonstrating the power of this media coverage, Law notes that the "prisoner advocacy organization Legal Services for Prisoners with Children had been reporting the prisoners' complaints about medical staff's sexual misconduct to the CDC for four years with no result."

Along with agitating for coverage in the mainstream media, women prisoners have also created their own media projects. The chapter titled "Breaking The Silence: Incarcerated Women's Media" documents many important projects. Law explains that these projects are necessary because women prisoners' "voices and stories still remain unheard by both mainstream and activist-oriented media. Articles about both prison conditions and prisoners often portray the male prisoner experience, ignoring the different issues facing women in prison." Therefore, "women's acts of writing -- and publishing -- often serve a dual purpose: they challenge existing stereotypes and distortions of prisoners and prison life, framing and correcting prevailing (mis) perceptions. They also boost women's sense of self-worth and agency in a system designed to not only isolate and alienate its prisoners but also erase all traces of individuality."

Some activist-oriented publications have been receptive and have published prisoners' writings.
From 1999 until its final issue in 2002, the radical feminist magazine Sojourner: A Women's Forum featured a section on women prisoner issues which included writings from the prisoners themselves. Law writes that this section, entitled "Inside/Outside" covered many topics, including "working conditions in women's facilities, the dehumanizing treatment of children visiting their mothers, and prisoner suicides.

Law spotlights many different projects. From 2002 to 2006, Perceptions was a monthly newspaper published by and for the women at the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women in New Jersey. Because of censorship from prison warden Charlotte Blackwell, Perceptions was forced to limit its criticism of the prison, but the women published what they could. For example, in one issue, women wrote about how they would run the prison differently if they were in charge. Law notes that "their fantasies revealed the absence of programming for older women and those in the maximum custody unit, emergency counseling and therapeutic interventions and opportunities for mother-child interactions. It also drew attention to the facility's overcrowding and increased potentials for violence and conflict among prisoners."

Tenacious, the zine published by Law, was initiated by women prisoners who sought the help of friends outside the prison to actually publish and distribute it. "Free from the need to seek administrative approval, incarcerated women wrote about the difficulties of parenting from prison, dangerously inadequate health care, sexual assault by prison staff and the scarcity of educational and vocational opportunities, especially in comparison to their male counterparts. Although circulation remained small, the women's stories provoked public response," writes Law.

"Prison officials do whatever they can to strip prisoners of their dignity and self-worth," stated Barrilee Bannister, one of the founders of Tenacious. "Writing is my way to escape the confines of prison and the debilitating ailments of prison life. It's me putting on boxing gloves and stepping into the rink of freedom of speech and opinion."

Arguing For Prison Abolition

When Victoria Law was first introduced to radical politics, shortly after her own stint behind bars, she "discovered groups and literature espousing prison abolition."

"These analyses -- coupled with what I had seen firsthand -- made sense, steering me to work towards the dismantling, rather than the reform, of the prison system." Law's subsequent research has only served to affirm her belief in the need for abolition. She states clearly that "this book should not be mistaken for a call for more humane or 'gender responsive' prisons."

Some readers may view Law's prison abolitionist politics as being abstract or overly theoretical.

However, to support her abolitionist viewpoint, she makes the practical argument that prisons simply don't work to reduce crime or increase public safety. She writes that "incarceration has not decreased crime; instead, 'tough on crime' policies have led to the criminalization … of more activities, leading to higher rates of arrest, prosecution and incarceration while shifting money and resources away from other public entities, such as education, housing, health care, drug treatment, and other societal supports. The growing popularity of abolitionist thought can be seen in the expansion of organizations such as Critical Resistance, an organization fighting to end the need for a prison-industrial complex, and the formation of groups working to address issues of crime and victimization without relying on the police or prisons."

Towards the end of Resistance Behind Bars, Law quotes Angela Y. Davis, who is a leading activist intellectual of the prison abolitionist movement. In her recent book Are Prisons Obsolete?, Davis writes that "a major challenge of this movement is to do the work that will create more human, habitable environments for people in prison without bolstering the permanence of the prison system. How, then, do we accomplish this balancing act of passionately attending to the needs of prisoners -- calling for less violent conditions, an end to sexual assault, improved physical and mental health care, greater access to drug programs, better educational work opportunities, unionization of prison labor, more connections with families and communities, shorter or alternative sentencing -- and at the same time call for alternatives to sentencing altogether, no more prison construction, and abolitionist strategies that question the place of the prison in our future?"

As if answering Davis' question, Law concludes that while striving for prison abolition "we need to also reach in, make contact with those who have been isolated by prison walls and societal indifference and listen to those who are speaking out, like many of the women who have shared their stories within this book. Because abolishing prisons will not happen tomorrow, next week or even next year, we need to break through these barriers, communicate, work with and support women who are in resistance today."

Saturday, September 4, 2010

Sweet Honey in The Rock: Are We A Nation?

Check out Sweet Honey in the Rock's new video, "Are We A Nation?" - it's awesome. The organization that's sponsoring it helped drive the supported housing movement for people with mental illness when I developed my program in Ann Arbor in the 90's - they're a fantastic resource.

Beware my anarchist friends - this has a real patriotic flavor, but it's a lot better than "America the Beautiful" or "The Star Spangled Banner", it recalls the truth of our collective history, and it puts the greedy racist pigs running Arizona to shame. It's also good to dance to: Rock on!

Joe Arpaio should be prosecuted, not sued.

I don't know what the big deal is about the feds "suing" the MCSO. I know a lot of folks celebrated this news yesterday, but all it did was piss me off more - that man should be arrested, disarmed, and awaiting trial in a jail cell. He sure shouldn't be out doing more "crime suppression sweeps". We haven't been marching and writing and waiting this long for the feds to sue our county. Arpaio's been sued by plenty of people - and he's never the one who pays, even when he's responsible for killing someone. While good people are being prosecuted as criminals for resisting that man's evil, the DOJ is just stalling until his term expires so they don't have to take responsibility for how he's treated people. I think he does a lot of their dirty work, anyway.


What a mistake to even hope that the Obama administration would come to our rescue in Maricopa County. Look at who the president tapped for Homeland Security, after all - she did nothing but enable this guy. Joe Arpaio may entertain a lot of the nation, but he shouldn't be dismissed as just a clown, a controversial politician, or an incompetent sheriff (though he is all those things): he's an armed and dangerous criminal. After all, what's false arrest if not kidnapping? Racial profiling if not a hate crime? Misuse of public funds if not stealing by both deceit and force? Vindictive investigations and prosecution if not destruction of livelihood and threat to life and limb?


We prosecute young people for terrorist conspiracies just for plotting to drag a few newsboxes into an intersection to momentarily stop the madness of an exploitative, vicious, greedy world. That's not terrorism - that's disrupting the flow of traffic. Using violence or intimidation to coerce political figures or communities is terrorism - which means that Janet still has a job to do here. If anyone else did what Arpaio has been doing, Homeland Security would have swooped in with the DOJ long ago - except that the feds think he's been doing it to people that they really don't give a shit about, either. As I suggested above, it just means less work for them, and by contrast they end up looking like the "good guys", even when all they do is play this game of chastising him.


America is hardly the land of the free or the home of the brave, but most of the rest of the world figured that out a long time ago. We throw the truly courageous and liberated souls into prison like murderers, lest they expose the brutal, corrupt nation we are. So, the feds can slap Sheriff Joe on the wrist or give him a medal - unless they prosecute him as the criminal he is, though, they can take my citizenship and shove it.


They, like Arpaio, are just tools of this hateful, whi
te supremacist, patriarchal empire - they sure aren't serving the People. Arpaio and his kind are heroes only to those who benefit from perpetuating a slave state, and those who have been conditioned to fear the consequences of true justice. They and their kindred invaded and reproduced in this region with an explicit agenda in mind - gaining and maintaining their own wealth and power by impoverishing and criminalizing everyone who resists. It never ceases to amaze me how people like Russ Pearce manage to twist the truth of our collective history. It seems so blatant that I just don't understand how the rest of the country keeps falling for their lies and histrionics. We are indeed a nation of fools.


Well, I'm descended from the Pilgrims and soldiers of the American Revolution - I even carry Brigham Young's genes - but what I learned growing up (from my Young Republican parents, even) was that my family's relative privilege and our presence in this hemisphere by violent conquest makes me all the more responsible for preventing similar injustices from occurring here and now. It sure doesn't entitle me to subordinate the rest of those who populate this land, regardless of where our government erects borders and points its guns.


So, fuck you, your Keystone cops, and your source of power, Sheriff Joe - you are a corruption of what America has claimed to be. That's a claim that's led many young people to kill and die for the ideals of freedom and democracy - which you've done everything you can to subvert. Fuck the feds, too - they didn't come to our rescue - they just keep sending reinforcements to finish us off. And shame on every other American citizen who isn't resisting Power in this place - especially those citizens who lack color. You're like the so-called Christians who owned slaves, or felt a little guilty about it but looked the other way at the auction. I don't know what's so difficult about understanding that someone like Christ would never have voted for those who do violence in His name.


There are many ways to defeat racism and colonialism like this, but you are mistaken if you think you've found a neutral place from which to comfortably watch, tuning in once in awhile for to either vent about evil or scapegoat those
being victimized by it. In fact, if you're comfortable with any of what's going on in Arizona - and not at least boycotting this place - then you're already with them, condoning the repression, deportation, incarceration, and even slaughter of people America once so gladly welcomed. The condition was that they had to remain in perpetual servitude - it was only when they began seeking liberty and justice that we decided that migrants were all criminals and aliens. Now the good Senator Pearce wants their children to be born into slavery, too.


What has become of us?


There's never been any consistency in the enforcement of law in America, but in Arizona it's especially biased and mean. Power here demands that people like Arpaio seduce the already-sympathetic, and brutalize everyone else into submission. It's already made sure he doesn't have to go out of his way to put people like me behind bars. The law of this land and its enforcers have no credibility with me; they have my contempt. I guess that makes me another radical preaching anarchy. Call me an outlaw, too, then: I haven't carried state ID since SB 1070 was passed - I know very well who I am, and a good many of the people who would incarcerate me do, too.


I've already said what I think of the DOJ - they're worse than a joke because invested in them is a lot of people's hope. I've been begging them
for help for a year and they've answered with nothing but silence as people keep suffering and dying in these prisons. But if I refused to comply with them in the face of an investigation, I'd be charged with obstruction of justice and held without bond while search warrants were issued for everything they wanted - including my DNA for their database. They sure as hell wouldn't be suing me in civil court. What are they doing dancing with our Sheriff around this, then?


Law enforcement officers should be held to a higher standard of non-violence against citizens than anyone else precisely because they already have the guns, the training, and the benefit of the judge's and jury's doubt. Besides, they have a sworn duty to protect and defend us. Instead, however, it's the public that's held to a higher standard when it comes to the welfare of cops, whatever uniform they wear. Even the FBI is guaranteed to brutalize us if we cross them in any way, and the courts will back them up by dishing out solitary confinement for life, if they want - the Black Panthers are a prime example. So, I'm not really optimistic about the DOJ doing anything to rein in anyone's excessive use of force - not by the MCSO or anyone else. A lot of the violence against those targeted by police is done by prosecutors, anyway, in concert with the powers that be - far more than by cops walking their beat.


Case in point: the Arpaio 5. The feds are here because the Maricopa County Attorney wouldn't lift a finger to stop the MCSO from assailing the community (Andrew Thomas was in cahoots with him, anyway), even though tens of thousands of us have demonstrated repeatedly. But the MCA has no problem charging some of those youth who protested police tactics at last January's anti-Arpaio march as violent criminals for the chaos that erupted near the end with the Phoenix PD. There's a double standard, alright.

some of the more colorful anarchists
at the January 16, 2010 anti-Arpaio march.

No one who was there or has seen the multitude of videos can agree on what really happened - much less who was most to blame for police actions - so the default version of the "truth" is, as usual, the one told by the cops (and the Phoenix New Times - thanks a lot, Lemons). Those poor, frail officers (in body armor) were assaulted, obstructed and resisted by a handful of kids half their size who were being trampled by police horses and bikes, blinded by pepper spray, and threatened by a well-equipped cavalry.


Had I been there, I could have easily bumped (or been pushed) into a cop while trying to get out of the way, or arrested fo
r interfering while trying to keep a friend from getting killed in the melee. But apparently it doesn't matter to the county attorney what your intent or your actual capacity to hurt anyone was: if you touch a cop with anything from a banner to silly string, your ass is theirs - especially if you call yourself an anarchist, wear all black, and dare to talk back to state authority. You're really in trouble if you're a woman on top of all that.


So I keep thinking, if Justice is really blind and
one's purpose apparently doesn't matter in assault, then shouldn't the cop who hit toddlers with pepper spray be charged, too? Regardless of what frightened her or who she really intended to blind and cause pain (I really doubt she was aiming for the kids), totally innocent children got hurt - the videos and witnesses are pretty clear that little ones were screaming and all red and teary-eyed because they got sprayed. Relatively speaking, that seems to have been a far more serious "assault" than crashing into someone - even if that someone was a cop. If that officer doesn't do time for injuring bystanders by deploying her weapon - be it in self-defense or out of carelessness in all that confusion - why do the kids who got nabbed in the heat of the moment get screwed?


I'm especially disturbed that there's no semblance of proportionality in terms of what the Arpaio 5 are being accused of and what they might be charged with if they don't surrender their rig
ht to trial now. They clearly aren't considered to be a threat to public safety, since they aren't being held without bail and the plea deals being offered don't all entail jail. If they maintain their innocence, however, some are being promised the violence inherent in incarceration if they don't prevail in court - one has been told that if she puts up a defense she'll be prosecuted for a serious felony that would carry a mandatory minimum sentence of over ten years in prison.


That floored me - that's literally 100 times more severe than what she'd get if she just pleads guilty now. If the county attorney really thought this young woman was a danger to society, she'd be on her way to prison already. They're coercing her with a promise of harsh retaliation for resistance, not a deal negotiated in the interest of justice. The state isn't trying to protect the public, or even the police. They're trying to repress and silence these young people - and all their friends, by making an example of them - for their defiance of police authority, not for perpetrating violence on police officers. Yet how often do courts punish the cops with incarceration for harassing, pepper spraying, or wrongfully arresting one of us - much less beating or killing someone? They seldom ever treat it as criminal. All they're usually willing to do is let us sue the department they work for - like the DOJ is suing Arpaio.


The DOJ is basically a big fat cop, and thus isn't much different than anyone in Maricopa County - or the State of Arizona - for failing to press criminal charges against anyone at the top of the MCSO, letting Arpaio and his goons off the hook for the criminal harm they've done to so many people. Regardless of how embarrassing he is to the rest of law enforcement, he's still one of their own, so different standards of conduct - lower standards - apply than those which the rest of us are held to. Similarly, neither Thomas' nor Romley's office would prosecute any of the prison guards for Marcia Powell's homicide. Why not? They told me that despite 10,000 pages of testimony and evidence (and a year to investigate), they still couldn't sort out who did what. There were just "too many conflicting stories".


What??? Of course they're all pointing fingers at each other - no one ever wants to take the rap. Prosecute them ALL, then, and let them sort it out in plea bargains like you'd do to any of us. Don't let them off with the modified Nuremburg defense ("No one was following policy; it wasn't just me. Breaking the rules was SOP.") Who else would duck a negligent homicide charge in that situation but agents of the law? They may all tell a different story, but the story they tell is that it wasn't them. Again, the default version of the truth is theirs.


That's pathetic. I just don't believe that the Maricopa County Attorney can't even come up with a misdemeanor charge against one of sixteen (16) prison guards (officers of the law) who mocked or ignored a woman they had locked in a cage in the desert sun, leaving her for over 3 hours without water to defecate on herself, suffer horribly, and finally die with second degree burns on her body. There was enough culpability in her death for the prosecutor I discussed it with to say that it's unfortunate no one can find survivors with standing to sue the AZ Department of Corrections - that's the only way justice would be done, apparently, not through the efforts of the Maricopa County Attorney's office to find it. They're too busy prosecuting kids for challenging the police.


If Marcia Powell had been
a child in the care of a parent, the MCA would be looking for someone to execute within days of her death, not closing the file a year later. At the very least negligent homicide charges would be brought. They'd be quicker to prosecute someone if Marcia was a dog, actually - and then they'd erect a memorial for the poor thing. Being "tough on crime" apparently doesn't apply if the perpetrator wears a badge and the victim is a whore with no family to bury her remains. I can tell you from the hits on my blog and the emails in my box about Marcia Powell: the entire world is disgusted with us - all of us, not just the AZ Department of Corrections.


I don't know where the original cancer in this place started - I think it was long before Arpaio, though. The MCSO is just one of the worst sites it metastasized to; it certainly isn't the only one. Nevertheless, Joe Arpaio and his cronies should be excised from this community immediately if we are to ever know the meaning of justice here. The DOJ isn't promising that, however. What consequences does Arpaio face if he loses this round to the feds, anyway? A big fine, perhaps? No - the rest of the county has to pay that part, most of which will come out of lifesaving resources for the poor, of course. They don't even broach the issue of restitution for his victims. Does he actually have to step down (with a healthy pension), or maybe just promise to "reform"? No indication that they have that in mind, either - he could run for office again, for all we know. So, what are all those civil rights laws for, anyway, if they leave abusers in power and enjoying the fruits of their crimes? I really don't know what the point of their lawsuit is, except for the feds to say they did something (even if it amounts to nothing beyond them reclaiming a few million bucks).


Even though it's a rare thing for the Justice Department to sue a police agency, this lawsuit is still petty bullshit when you stack it up against what the man and his machine have done. As far as I'm concerned, Arpaio is worse than the schoolyard bully that too many people dismiss him as. He's more like a gang leader being allowed to run loose with deadly weapons, commandeering an army of thugs who, at his orders, are kidnapping people, committing hate crimes, terrorizing communities, collecting protection money, and persecuting his enemies with threats of violence under the color of "law" - all while he's "under federal investigation" for civil rights violations. How is it not a real crime to violate someone's civil rights, anyway - especially when you chain them up in the process?


Maybe the documents Arpaio refuses to release hold evidence of corruption that could be criminally prosecuted - if so, they have or will be destroyed before he lets them destroy him. I doubt that man will ever get sentenced to jail or prison time, like some of the Arpaio 5 might.
Marcia Powell was killed while doing a 27-month prison sentence for offering a cop a blow job, while Arpaio has prostituted himself to White Power for as long as he's been in office, spreading his racist, misogynistic venom in the community like an STD. He's a far greater threat to public safety than either the Arpaio 5 or Marcia could possibly be. So how is it that in the nation which incarcerates more of its citizens than anyone else in the world, this man is not worried about going to prison? I find this to be a very disturbing miscarriage of justice all the way around.


I can't imagine what more the DOJ needs to investigate to prosecute Arpaio. There's no lack of witnesses or evidence here to his criminal conduct: he's publicly boasted about it to no end. He should be arrested immediately and held without bail so the communities he persecutes don't have to keep living in fear. Unfortunately, no one with power in this state defends the common people or human rights - people like Russ Pearce cultivate bigoted, selfish, abusive men (and women) like him. They know Arpaio and his henchmen will enforce only those laws they make to protect their own interests - against those who resist or can be bullied - with the consent of a largely "Christian" public that votes from their fear, rather than from what they profess is their faith.



My bet is that I'll be the one who ends up in jail before the feds pack up and go home - not Sheriff Joe. If any of the Arpaio 5 are doing time there, though, I'd be more free in their company for cursing the state than I would be if I silently empowered the evil
holding the keys to our chains.



one of the Phx PD's more dangerous hoodlums:
"Remember Marcia Powell"

-----------------------------------------------

Department of Justice Sues Maricopa County Sheriff's Office for Refusing to Cooperate With Investigation

Friday 03 September 2010

by: Nadia Prupis, t r u t h o u t | Report

The US Justice Department (DOJ) filed a lawsuit against controversial Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Thursday for alleged civil rights violations and refusal to cooperate with a federal probe.

Arpaio, who leads the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) and calls himself "America's toughest sheriff," has drawn both criticism and support as one of the country's most outspoken opponents of illegal immigration. Arpaio is also an active participant in 287(g) - a program funded by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that trains and authorizes state police departments in enforcing federal immigration laws. The MCSO has deported more than 26,000 immigrants in the past three years, one-quarter of the national total of 115,841.

Since March 2009, the DOJ has attempted to investigate Arpaio for a litany of alleged civil rights abuses, including racial profiling, unconstitutional searches and seizures and enforcement of English-only policies in his jails, but Arpaio's office has refused to produce all the requested documents. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits federally funded programs such as 287(g) from discriminating on the basis of race, color and national origin, and grant recipients are required to provide the DOJ full access to documents, facilities and staff during investigations. To receive federal funds for its participation in 278(g), the MCSO signed contractual agreements that assured its compliance with Title VI and promised its full cooperation with discrimination probes.

This DOJ investigation is not the first time Arpaio has faced federal charges for civil rights abuses. A separate probe launched this year by a grand jury is looking into abuse of power charges against Arpaio after he conducted baseless prosecutions of political opponents. In 1997, the DOJ also investigated Arpaio for civil rights abuses within his jails, alleging that he deliberately failed to discipline guards who subjected inmates to excessive use of force. Arpaio's compliance in that case led to the implementation of more humane jail policies, including the limited use of pepper spray, stun guns and restraint chairs.

Thursday's lawsuit marks the first time in more than 30 years that the DOJ has had to sue a police force for compliance. Arpaio refused to comply with an August 17 and a September 10 deadline to produce documents requested over 15 months ago.

"The actions of the sheriff's office are unprecedented," said Thomas E. Perez, assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division. "It is unfortunate that the department was forced to resort to litigation to gain access to public documents and facilities."

Arpaio's attorney Robert Driscoll wrote in a letter to Judy Preston, acting chief for the Special Litigation Section, that the MCSO "certainly did not agree that every document DOJ requested is required to be produced in a Title VI investigation ... If DOJ seeks to dictate every deadline and maintain the position that it, in its sole discretion, can determine what it wants and when, without any reasonable limitations on scope and without any input from MCSO, what DOJ truly seeks is compelled or coerced compliance. MCSO is committed to providing DOJ with a reasonable amount of information and documents based upon which DOJ can investigate allegations of national origin discrimination."

The MCSO and Arpaio's alleged crimes violate not only Title VI, but also the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 and the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. According to the lawsuit, if the MCSO is found guilty of discriminatory behavior, Maricopa County stands to lose an estimated $113 million in federal grants. The funds also go toward programs such as assistance for low-income families and health care for the homeless.

During a press conference Thursday morning, Arpaio expressed disappointment in the ongoing investigation. "I thought we were really close to getting this resolved," Arpaio said. He also promised to proceed with his current operation of 278(g), stating, "I'm going to continue, maybe tomorrow, to enforce all the illegal immigration laws ... As [State Senator Russell Pearce] always says, 'Take the handcuffs off the cops.' I'm not going to be intimidated by the federal government going to court against us."

Thursday, September 2, 2010

From Conspire to Perryville, with love.

I also did a few actions earlier in the evening, chalking up the sidewalks outside of the Goddard Brewer debate, bringing my signs by the Capitol and ADC for some postcard photos, and stopping by Conspire to get some friends to help me show some solidarity with the women at Perryville / Santa Cruz who are on lock-down and have been resisting the conditions there...




Note that this cop doesn't hassle me -

he just looks curious. (Central)










(First St./KAET)







I knew the ADC central Office would want to show the women their support, so I included them in my evening shoot. The light was awesome.












While I was there, I also pulled my Hep C

sign out - looks pretty sharp, eh?
Great postcard that'll make.




















Didn't want to leave the Governor's office out, either.






And finally, the women of Conspire,
in solidarity with our sisters in Perryville Prison.
Resist!

Justice for cops and the privileged few...

Upon reading Stephen Lemons' article about Marcia tonight, I became highly agitated and needed to chalk. So, I chalked up the sidewalks outside the Maricopa County Attorney's office.

Figured it might be the only way I'd ever get
heard by Romley on the matter. Left my card at the scene in case he needs me to clarify any of what I had to say. It was dark, so the photos are kind of grainy - sorry.

Was stopped by a couple of detectives at one point, who told me I was breaking the law. Was about ready to pick a fight over that (I've been told repeatedly by cops - after they hassle me - that it's not criminal damage if
it's chalk on a public sidewalk), but they didn't have time to argue with me about it and took off so I went back to work until I got it out of my system...


I find it really disheartening - and enraging - that when a cop gets bumped by a couple of kids at a rally, they call it a violent assault and threaten to put a young woman in prison for the next decade over it. But when a woman is locked in a cage in 108 heat, tormented and taunted and ignored until she collapses in her own feces, the county attorney's office can't even find a misdemeanor complaint to file against any one of the 16 people the ADC held responsible for her death. That's pathetic and deeply disturbing. So, when it comes to "justice" here, even with Andy Thomas out the rest of us are screwed.


Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Free Marcia Powell...

This is sickening. My own comments (left on the PHX New Times site) are at the end.

-----------------------------
Marcia Powell's Death Unavenged: County Attorney Passes on Prosecuting Prison Staff

Categories: Feathered Bastard

The Maricopa County Attorney's Office has chosen not to prosecute Arizona Department of Corrections staff in the death of inmate Marcia Powell.

Powell, 48, died May 20, 2009, after being kept in a human cage in Goodyear's Perryville Prison for at least four hours in the blazing Arizona sun. This, despite a prison policy limiting such outside confinement to a maximum of two hours.

The county medical examiner found the cause of death to be due to complications from heat exposure. Her core body temperature upon examination was 108 degrees Fahrenheit. She suffered burns and blisters all over her body.

Witnesses say she was repeatedly denied water by corrections officers, though the c.o.'s deny this. The weather the day she collapsed from the heat (May 19 -- she died in the early morning hours of May 20) arched just above a 107 degree high.

According to a 3,000 page report released by the ADC, she pleaded to be taken back inside, but was ignored. Similarly, she was not allowed to use the restroom. When she was found unconscious, her body was covered with excrement from soiling herself.

Powell, who was serving a 27-month sentence for prostitution, actually expired after being transported to West Valley Hospital, where acting ADC Director Charles Ryan made the decision to have her life support suspended.

(Ryan lacked the authority to do this, but that's another story, which you can read about, here.)

ADC conducted its own criminal investigation into Powell's agonizing demise. The information I have indicates that ADC submitted its conclusions to the county attorney earlier this year. (Please see update below.) ADC was seeking charges of negligent homicide against at least seven c.o.'s, as well as related charges against other prison staff.

Why didn't the county attorney's office pursue those charges? Apparently, they didn't think they could prevail in court.

County attorney spokesman Bill Fitzgerald issued the following terse statement.

"There is insufficient evidence to go forward with a prosecution against any of the named individuals," he e-mailed me, declining to elaborate further.

Donna Hamm of the advocacy group Middle Ground Prison Reform wasn't buying it.

"Having read the bulk of those 3,000 pages of reports," she told me, "if someone in a prosecutorial position can't find a crime in those pages, they have absolutely no credibility in my opinion."

Hamm noted that guards passed Powell several times throughout her stay in the cage, and that some mocked her pleas for water. As for c.o. claims that Powell was given water, Hamm countered that Powell's eyes "were as dry as parchment," and that the autopsy results show there was no sign of hydration.

Hamm was incredulous that the county attorney couldn't find enough evidence to bring charges.

"It's just beyond comprehension," she stated. "This is the same office that has prosecuted mothers who left their babies in a couple of inches of water to go outside and take a cell phone call or look in the mail."

She also cited the case of "Buffalo Soldier" Charles Long, who was prosecuted by the MCAO for negligent homicide in the 2001 death of a kid who had enrolled in his program for troubled teens and died after being exposed to the heat and put in a bath, where he inhaled water.

The ADC did make some reforms in the wake of Powell's death. It was discovered that the cages were being used to control unruly prisoners, and the ADC claims this practice has stopped. However, Hamm says she has uncovered a case of a man in a Tucson facility who, earlier this year, was held all day and overnight in an outside cage.

Some 16 prison employees were sanctioned in one way or another as a result of the Powell incident, and some were fired. But Hamm says she believes some of those sanctioned have been reinstated.

The outdoor cages are still in use, but have been retrofitted to provide shade, misters, water stations, and benches, which, ironically, Hamm says are metal, and would thus soak up the heat. She's toured ADC facilities to see the redone cages, and admits that changes are positive, but too late to save Powell's life, obviously.

"All the retrofitting in the world is worthless if the staff doesn't follow the policy," she insisted.

Powell had been diagnosed as mentally ill, and was on more than one psychotropic drug, drugs that increased her sensitivity to heat, sunlight and lack of water. All the more reason, according to Hamm, that prison staff should be held accountable.

The only next of kin that was located for Powell was an aged, adoptive mother in California, who had not had contact with Powell for years, and did not want to take possession of the remains.

So, with the help of Hamm and others, Powell's ashes were interred last year at Phoenix's Shadow Rock Church of Christ.

Brophy College Preparatory School also dedicated a plaque to Powell on school grounds this year.

But with no one with standing to bring a federal lawsuit (Hamm says the deadline for a state lawsuit has expired), and with the MCAO unwilling to bring a case against those responsible for Powell's well-being, there looks to be no justice for the schizophrenic deceased woman.

I asked Hamm what this means for the case.

"It means they've gotten away with the most colossal example of brutality I have seen against a female prisoner in the history of the Arizona Department of Corrections," remarked Hamm, adding, "And they got off scot-free."

Update, 9/1/10 2:29 PM: ADC spokesman Barrett Marson told me today that the ADC submitted its criminal investigation to the MCAO back on August 20, 2009. He said he did not know if the ADC asked for charges on certain employees.

----------------------------------

So, the county attorney can put a mentally ill, incapacitated woman in prison for 27 months for a blow job, but can't even come up with a single misdemeanor out of the 16 people who killed her?

The women out at Perryville are still getting neglected and abused as if nothing ever happened - and some of those staff got their fucking jobs back. Here's the people responsible for those appeals - Marcia's life was worth less than this woman's job security, apparently. I think we should all converge on the next meeting these people have - if they'd post it. They just had one yesterday and the minutes or next meeting aren't up, so here's their phone # (602) 542-3888.

From the AZ State Personnel Board, June 15, 2010:

The Arizona State Personnel Board meeting was called to order by Chair Jim Thompson at 1:36 p.m. The meeting was held at 1400 West Washington Street, Suite 280, Phoenix, Arizona. Board members present were Jim Thompson, Stella Galaviz, Patrick Quinn, and Joseph Smith. Board member Mark Ziska was present telephonically. Staff members in attendance were Jeff Bernick, Counsel for the Board; Judy Henkel, Executive Director for the Board; and Laurie Barcelona, Administrative Assistant for the Board.

Mr. Thompson called for public comments. There being no comments, the board proceeded to consider the approval of the minutes from the May 19, 2010 open public meeting. Patrick Quinn moved the minutes be adopted as written. Mark Ziska and Joseph Smith simultaneously seconded the motion which carried unanimously.

The board next considered the dismissal appeal of Electra Allen versus Department of Corrections.

Martin Bihn, Attorney at Law representing Electra Allen, stated the hearing officer recommended the dismissal be reduced to an 80 hour suspension without pay. He stated there were three contacts for which Ms. Allen was allegedly dismissed. Mr. Bihn stated the first contact was when Ms. Allen was told by a CO III that Inmate Powell was on medication and should not be in the sun. He stated the hearing officer found the CO III was the responsible officer who should have taken some action. Mr. Bihn stated the second issue was when Inmate Powell yelled she wanted to talk to Dr. Kaz, Ms. Allen asked the inmate why, Inmate Powell stated she wanted to know when she was going to be transferred, Ms. Allen called on her radio, found out the transfer would occur shortly, and that was the end of the conversation. He stated the hearing officer found Ms. Allen’s version of events to be accurate and the allegation was not a basis for discipline. Mr. Bihn stated the third basis for discipline was that Ms. Allen just prior to shift change stopped by and saw Inmate Powell had defecated on herself. He stated instead of staying overtime, Ms. Allen informed the oncoming shift of what had occurred and she left for the day. Mr. Bihn stated the hearing officer felt that action warranted discipline but not termination. He stated there were many players involved in the death of the inmate, but Electra Allen was not directly responsible as the agency was attempting to make her out to be. Mr. Bihn urged the board to adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and sustain the hearing officer’s recommendation of an 80 hour suspension without pay.

Dennis Carpenter, Assistant Attorney General representing the Department of Corrections, stated Electra Allen had three opportunities to intervene in Inmate Powell’s situation and possibly save her life. He stated at approximately 12:00 p.m. Ms. Allen was told by the counselor that Inmate Powell was on medication and should not be left out in the sun, yet Ms. Allen did nothing with that information. Mr. Carpenter stated a short time later Inmate Powell asked Ms. Allen if she could speak with Dr. Kaz but Ms. Allen just told Inmate Powell that she would be moved soon. Ms. Allen did not notify medical that there had been a request for the doctor to speak with the inmate. He stated at 1:50 p.m. Ms. Allen went to an area near the enclosure where Inmate Powell was being held and she noticed that Inmate Powell had defecated on herself. Mr. Carpenter stated Ms. Allen just left for the day, did nothing to clean up Inmate Powell, nor did she tell anyone Inmate Powell needed to be cleaned up. He stated the hearing officer found this action did not lead directly to the inmate’s death but the agency disagrees. Mr. Carpenter stated if Ms. Allen had at 1:50 p.m. taken Inmate Powell into the bathroom and cleaned her up, Inmate Powell probably would not have collapsed 40 minutes later and died. He stated the agency believed Ms. Allen’s actions led directly to the death of Inmate Powell and warranted termination.

There being no discussion, Joseph Smith proposed the following motion:

"I would move that we adopt the hearing officer’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as our own. I would then move that the appellant’s appeal be upheld to the extent the agency action of dismissal be modified to a suspension of 160 hours without pay, and that all back pay and benefits be restored to her save and except those during the above suspension, those equal to any unemployment benefits received since dismissal, and those received at the time of dismissal. I would further move that the appellant be returned to the same exact position she held prior to her dismissal, including the same work location, duties, job title, salary, and benefits if said position is currently available. In the event the appellant’s former position is not available, the agency shall return the appellant to substantially equivalent a position as is currently available with equivalent benefits, pay, and other terms and conditions of employment.”

The motion was seconded by Patrick Quinn and carried with aye votes from Joseph Smith, Patrick Quinn, and Jim Thompson. Mark Ziska and Stella Galaviz voted nay.

One more comment: Those officers - agents of the law - who killed Marcia are the violent criminals, not the Arpaio 5 who they're trying to prosecute as such. The county attorney's office seems to be as screwed up as it was under Thomas. So much for protecting the People - they just protect their own. Here's their phone number too: (602) 506-3411. Please call tomorrow - don't just vent here.

ASPC-Perryville: Urgent re: Conditions of Confinement

According to the parent of a woman in medium security (Santa Cruz) at ASPC-Perryville, a new policy has just been put into place locking the women down for 22hrs/day, essentially turning the yard into a high security setting. Apparently this is in response to the recent Kingman escapes, not to misconduct on the part of these women.

This news is particularly troublesome because of the heat, for starters, as there is no A/C in the cells they're being confined to, and the swamp coolers seldom work. Families are constantly concerned about the health of those prone to succumb to heat as it is, now even more so since they get such little relief. There's no enclosed, cooled rec room for them to use when they do get time out - they have to spend it outdoors. Their resources are substandard in comparison to what many of the men have. And apparently it's been hard to get through to anyone there on the phone.

Thus far media has been alerted - as have some legislators - but no one is reporting on the horrendous heat and living conditions the women are forced to tolerate. In addition to the added physical strain it places on them to be held like that, such an environment can contribute to an escalation in tensions between prisoners, violence, depression, and suicidality.

Families and prisoners alike are protesting. According to reports from Perryville, some of the women from yard 18 refused to go back inside when rec was over. If this was one of the men's prisons, they'd be rioting and the media would be all over it, asking why. As the mother of one prisoner asks - what does it take for anyone to care about what these women are going through? Another Marcia Powell to die?

I urge readers to contact legislators, (especially Reps Cecil Ash and Kyrsten Sinema), media (Stephen Lemons at the PHX New Times, Morgan Loew at KPHO, JJ Hensley at the AZ Republic), the governor's office, the warden's office at Perryville (623-853-0304) and Constituent Services at the Arizona Department of Corrections (Betty Cassiano 602-364-3945). Tell them that the conditions of confinement for these women are unacceptable and urge them to challenge the ADC to come up with some mechanism for improving their security without compromising the health and safety of these prisoners. They should not be punished for the Kingman fiasco.

You needn't be a family member of a prisoner to speak up - just a concerned member of the community.

Paying it forward to the RNC8: Zombie 7 fights state terrorism

These zombies rock!

----------from Freedom Archives' Political Prisoner News----------------


Minnesota 'zombies' give $4,000 to 'targets of state repression'


Minneapolis - One of the seven people who put on a zombie street performance in downtown Minneapolis in 2006 to protest mindless consumption announced Thursday he is donating a portion of his settlement to other anarchists who are fighting legal charges.

Infoshop News reported on a video announcement made by Raphi Rechitsky Thursday, when Rechitsky said he and the others who make up the group now known as 'the Zombie 7', would donate at least $4,000 of the $165,000 they will receive from the City of Minneapolis to other anarchists fighting legal charges.

The Zombie 7 have decided to donate the money to eight people known as 'the RNC8' and a separate activist, Scott DeMuth. Rechitsky explained the decision in his video release, saying

"... We wanted to hold the city accountable for suppressing political action. And this week we were awarded a 165,000 dollar settlement from the City of Minneapolis. In my opinion, this money doesn't just belong to me, but all those who work for a better world. For that reason, I'm asking winners of political settlements to pay it forward and donate to targets of state repression."

Rechitsky said he personally was giving $1,500 to the RNC 8 and Scott DeMuth. "Repression is not isolated," Rechitsky explained. "Neither is resistance." Playing on the zombie reference, Rechitsky concluded,

"Use your brains. Pay it forward and defend all targets of state repression."

A press release accompanied the video announcement posted at Vimeo, explaining the Zombie 7 had donated a minimum of $4,000 towards the RNC8 and Scott DeMuth. In the release, Rechitsky said the Zombie 7 were motivated to donate a portion of their settlement because

"The Zombie 7 were not slapped with criminal charges after being absurdly arrested for 'simulating weapons of mass destruction. But countless others are prosecuted for their artistic and political expression, views, and associations, much like the RNC 8 and Scott DeMuth. They face not only jail time and exhausting legal proceedings, but also costly legal defense. My fellow zombies and I have come to understand that with a flip of a coin, we could have been the ones to face criminal charges on outrageous accusations of 'violence.'"

The donation answers some of the questions asked by the public since the Zombie 7 settlement was announced earlier this week. The group also said it will split the $165,000 award with their lawyer.

The RNC 8 are a group of eight anarchist activists who were arrested pre-emptively for their organizing efforts. The group was preparing to launch political protests at the Republican National Convention, which took place in Minneapolis in the spring of 2008. Police zeroed in on the eight after they posted a video promoting protests at the convention in 2007 they called."We're Getting ready! RNC Welcoming Committee trailer ."

According to the website, Defend the RNC8, the eight face serious charges.

"... The “RNC 8 were originally charged with conspiracy to riot in the 2nd degree in furtherance of terrorism, a felony which was the first ever use of Minnesota’s PATRIOT Act.

In December 2008, Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner (who is also running for Governor of Minnesota as a Democrat) added three more felony charges: 2nd degree conspiracy to riot (without the terrorism enhancement), 1st degree conspiracy to commit criminal damage to property in furtherance of terrorism, and 1st degree conspiracy to commit criminal damage to property (without the terrorism enhancement). Then, in April 2009, Gaertner dropped the two “in furtherance of terrorism” charges due to political pressure from RNC 8 supporters. The other two conspiracy charges still remain, and the RNC 8 still potentially face several years of prison time."

The eight charged, Luce Guillen-Givins, Max Specktor, Nathanael Secor, Eryn Trimmer, Monica Bicking, Erik Oseland, Robert Czernik and Garrett Fitzgerald, say their arrests are an attempt to 'criminalize activism.' In a press release issued in June, the group maintains they were arrested without probable cause.

Just prior to the 2008 Republican National Convention, St. Paul police arrested over 200 people. Common Dreams reported that 27 of those arrested filed a class action lawsuit against the city. In May this year, Democracy Now and journalist Amy Goodman also launched a lawsuit against Minneapolis for arresting Democracy Now journalists while they were covering the protests at the 2008 Convention.

In spite of the preemptive arrests, protests still took place. Attempts by police to control protesters resulted in at least one lawsuit filed against police for police brutality.

22 year old Scott DeMuth was arrested under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act in Iowa. He was arrested and charged with conspiracy after he refused to testify "... before a federal grand jury in Davenport that was investigating an Animal Liberation Front (ALF) raid at the University of Iowa in 2004." DeMuth is alleged to have participated in the 2004 raid of the University of Iowa.

During that raid, activists removed 401 animals from the University of Iowa, while vandalizing research labs and offices; destroying research. The Animal Liberation Front (ALF) claimed responsibility saying

"... If not for the brave efforts of these compassionate activists, these animals would have been forced to continue to face horrific treatment at the hands of the university’s researchers, having holes drilled into their head, being forced to suffer through severe dehydration, electrocution, and extreme cold, as well as the forced ingestion of cocaine, methamphetamine and PCP."

Those who support DeMuth say the charges against him are 'politically motivated.' A press release posted to Davenport Grand Jury explained

"... the prosecutor, Cliff Cronk, has repeatedly stated in court that DeMuth is a “domestic terrorist” because of his alleged political beliefs and associations."

The ALF alleges the investigation is fraudulent.

Preemptive arrests prior to major events have become a preferred way to police protests around the world. Denmark gave police power to arrest people preemptively just before the December 2009 UN climate change negotiations that took place in that country. The Guardian reported the new law meant police could arrest people solely on the suspicion that those arrested might commit a crime in the near future. Police were also allowed to detain people for 12 hours without charges.

The latest examples of preemptive arrests took place in Toronto, Canada during the G20 summit meeting. Toronto Star columnist Thomas Walkom summed up the issue as being a case where

"... those in charge of the police found civil liberties inconvenient."

Walkom concluded his article by saying preemptive arrests are "... the totalitarian’s recipe for public order."



Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110

415 863-9977

www.Freedomarchives.org


Questions and comments may be sent to claude@freedomarchives.org