Seventeen Days and Counting...
Posted by Brendan Kiley on Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 10:16 AM
- From one of the warrants, issued in Oregon.
Two of the three—Matt Duran and Katherine “KteeO” Olejnik—are currently imprisoned at the SeaTac FDC for refusing to cooperate. The third, Leah-Lynn Plante, who prosecutors admit was not in Seattle on May Day, remains free.
Duran had a hearing last week. Some eyewitness details from nopoliticalrepression.wordpress.com:
... Matt’s lawyer took the floor to explain Matt’s current conditions and intentions. Here is an abridged and bullet-point list of issues and information brought up by Matt’s lawyer in court —The local chapter of the National Lawyers Guild has urged the FBI and US Attorney Jenny Durkan to drop the subpoenas, arguing:
Matt is in Solitary Confinement (the Secure Housing Unit) which means …
+ he has very little access to phone
+ he has been denied the ability to initiate contact with attorney
+ he has been denied visitor request forms
+ he has been denied vegan food (has access to vegetarian options and commissary items)
+ he has no way of socializing within the prison
+ he has no access to sunlight, fresh air or an untinted window to the outdoors
Even under these conditions, Matt has no intention of changing his mind or strategy. Matt’s lawyer explained that Matt will be at peace no matter where he is within the prison. She said that he would like to socialize and play chess with other inmates, but is content where he is. He has a clock radio and a couple of romance novels the prison gave him upon arrival.
While grand juries are part of our federal criminal justice system, the grand jury was intended to serve as a protector of people’s rights and should not be used as a mechanism for intimidating those who speak out against social and economic injustice in our society. “Movements and individuals working for social change in the United States have historically been at the receiving end of grand juries being used to harass political activism,” said Neil Kelley, an officer of the Seattle NLG.Throughout the process, Emily Langlie from the US Attorney's office has reiterated: "We do not prosecute people for their political beliefs."
1
He pissed off the 1% and as we know the Dems and the GOP partisan
hacks are sworn to defend the 1% no matter what and destroy anyone and
anything that threatens their control of the country.
Expect more of this in the future.
Expect more of this in the future.
4
Serves him right. There is not nor should be, a right to refuse to
testify. The limited exception to this that is a person cannot be
compelled to testify against themselves.
If people could not be compelled to provide testimony there is no way the court system could work.
Would people feel the same way if this were an officer at a bank refusing to turn over records or provide testimony?
If people could not be compelled to provide testimony there is no way the court system could work.
Would people feel the same way if this were an officer at a bank refusing to turn over records or provide testimony?
6
A witness summoned to a Grand Jury can can refuse to answer any question on fifth amendment grounds.
That's kind of been left out of the posts on anarchist blogs that Brendan has been reblogging.
The witness may refuse to answer any question on the grounds that it might incriminate the defendant (or the witness), and the witness is told who the defendant is prior to testimony.
Refusing to testify before a grand jury isn't a principled refusal to answer "fishing expedition" questions; a witness can do that, perfectly legally, during his or her appearance before the grand jury.
Refusing to testify before a Grand Jury is instead an attempt to jam the legal system to protect the defendant, and it's a pretty smart propaganda play, if not a particularly effective legal maneuver.
Since the Grand Jury can't release the name of the defendant, public attention can, at least for a while, be deflected away from the alleged crime, and and a savvy propagandist can drum up liberal outrage over the confinement of a witness who has opted to sit in a cell for a few weeks rather than simply plead the fifth to the Grand Jury's questions.
That's kind of been left out of the posts on anarchist blogs that Brendan has been reblogging.
The witness may refuse to answer any question on the grounds that it might incriminate the defendant (or the witness), and the witness is told who the defendant is prior to testimony.
Refusing to testify before a grand jury isn't a principled refusal to answer "fishing expedition" questions; a witness can do that, perfectly legally, during his or her appearance before the grand jury.
Refusing to testify before a Grand Jury is instead an attempt to jam the legal system to protect the defendant, and it's a pretty smart propaganda play, if not a particularly effective legal maneuver.
Since the Grand Jury can't release the name of the defendant, public attention can, at least for a while, be deflected away from the alleged crime, and and a savvy propagandist can drum up liberal outrage over the confinement of a witness who has opted to sit in a cell for a few weeks rather than simply plead the fifth to the Grand Jury's questions.
8
@6
Er, I meant that the witness can refuse to answer any question solely on the grounds that it might incriminate the witness.
And of course in practical terms, that means the witness can refuse to answer any question at all, beyond name, rank, and serial number.
Er, I meant that the witness can refuse to answer any question solely on the grounds that it might incriminate the witness.
And of course in practical terms, that means the witness can refuse to answer any question at all, beyond name, rank, and serial number.
9
Unless the guy gives in he's gonna rot for a good long time so long
as his attorney argues against established law and not the facts.
10
@9
They can only hold the witnesses for civil contempt until the grand jury's term expires. That might be as much as two years, but it's usually less.
They can only hold the witnesses for civil contempt until the grand jury's term expires. That might be as much as two years, but it's usually less.
11
"Even under these conditions, Matt has no intention of changing his mind or strategy."
Okay, then I'll save my pity and concern for somebody else.
Okay, then I'll save my pity and concern for somebody else.
13
@12
I think your Google might be broken.
It sure would be satisfying if more bankers were put in the dock, and I'm panting as hard as the next person to see some really, really rich guys in leg irons and orange jumpsuits, but let's not pretend there aren't any district attorneys out there angling to boost their careers with some populist bankster-busting.
I think your Google might be broken.
It sure would be satisfying if more bankers were put in the dock, and I'm panting as hard as the next person to see some really, really rich guys in leg irons and orange jumpsuits, but let's not pretend there aren't any district attorneys out there angling to boost their careers with some populist bankster-busting.
14
Someone needs to tell Matt Duran that you really and truly don't
want to fuck with the federal government. It will end quite badly for
you, Matt.
15
@14
Fucking with the federal government is exactly what Matt Duran wants. Generally speaking, "fucking with government" is the means by which an anarchist tries to achieve the form of society that he or she believes in.
Fucking with the federal government is exactly what Matt Duran wants. Generally speaking, "fucking with government" is the means by which an anarchist tries to achieve the form of society that he or she believes in.
17
The Seattle Police discovered some anti-American literature in Cowen
Park the other day, next to a couple of contraptions made out of PVC
tubing. They closed the adjacent bridge for two hours while the bomb
squad dismantled the PVC tubing. The anti-Ämerican literature reportedly
turned out to be a paperback copy of The Plot Against America by Philip Roth. I'm not sure what the PVC tubing turned out to be. My uninformed guess is pipes or bongs, not pipe bombs.
On another note, I have some black clothing. Should I be worried? Should I get rid of it? What other colors should I wear from now on? What are goths doing? Are goths still a thing?
On another note, I have some black clothing. Should I be worried? Should I get rid of it? What other colors should I wear from now on? What are goths doing? Are goths still a thing?
18
@13 (robotslave): I think you know perfectly well that what
suddenlyorcas (@12) meant was Wall Street bankers being prosecuted for
their role in the mortgage-backed-securities debacle and its aftermath.
And that simply hasn't happened.
19
@Robotslave: 5th Amendment right to avoid self incrimination is just
that, the right to avoid SELF incrimination. If the witnesses guilt is
not in question, they do not have a right to take the fifth. That is
what is happening here; the state is giving prosecutorial immunity to
the witnesses so that they have no right to take the fifth.
20
@14, @15: Does refusing to testify result in a criminal record?
I'm sure Matt thinks he's doing the right thing, although wouldn't be surprised if his perspective on all this changes 20 years from now, when he's no longer young and dumb.
I'm sure Matt thinks he's doing the right thing, although wouldn't be surprised if his perspective on all this changes 20 years from now, when he's no longer young and dumb.
21
@ 16 (and others). There's more to life than like/dislike, approve/disapprove, yay/boo.
You are allowed to think critically about Matt Duran and the federal government at the same time.
Just FYI.
You are allowed to think critically about Matt Duran and the federal government at the same time.
Just FYI.
22
Nothing would make me happier than to see the entire black bloc
contingent and every last Wall Street bankster join together for a very
long stay in federal prison.
23
I kind of respect a guy with an unpopular opinion, punished by the
state, who's sticking to his guns. I'm too ignorant in matters of law
to have an informed opinion about the Fifth.
@17 Phillip Roth, huh? Well, the title does say it all. I always had my doubts about him.
@17 Phillip Roth, huh? Well, the title does say it all. I always had my doubts about him.
24
@19
Immunity to prosecution for specific crimes does not strip away a the fifth amendment rights of a witness. The witness can very reasonably claim fear of self-incrimination in matters unrelated to the target of the grand jury.
Blanket immunity would be another matter, but that's not something a grand jury can bestow.
@20
Actually, no, refusing to testify does not result in a criminal record. Refusal to testify in a grand jury is civil contempt, not criminal contempt.
@21
If you're allowed to think critically about both, then why aren't you thinking critically about the uncooperative witnesses? I suppose that's allowed as well, but it seems a little odd to practice one thing and preach another.
Immunity to prosecution for specific crimes does not strip away a the fifth amendment rights of a witness. The witness can very reasonably claim fear of self-incrimination in matters unrelated to the target of the grand jury.
Blanket immunity would be another matter, but that's not something a grand jury can bestow.
@20
Actually, no, refusing to testify does not result in a criminal record. Refusal to testify in a grand jury is civil contempt, not criminal contempt.
@21
If you're allowed to think critically about both, then why aren't you thinking critically about the uncooperative witnesses? I suppose that's allowed as well, but it seems a little odd to practice one thing and preach another.
26
"Immunity to prosecution for specific crimes does not strip away a the fifth amendment rights of a witness."
Dude, you're just wrong. None of these people who has been granted immunity has a fifth amendment right to refuse to testify. That's why they are thrown in prison: to compel testimony. That they aren't cowards (like you) is why they haven't testified.
Grand juries don't bestow immunity. Prosecutors do.
They might be charged with criminal contempt. Just because they haven't yet, doesn't mean they won't.
Dude, you're just wrong. None of these people who has been granted immunity has a fifth amendment right to refuse to testify. That's why they are thrown in prison: to compel testimony. That they aren't cowards (like you) is why they haven't testified.
Grand juries don't bestow immunity. Prosecutors do.
They might be charged with criminal contempt. Just because they haven't yet, doesn't mean they won't.
27
I wish this were a battle between steely eyed G-men and implacable
anarchist partisans, but its not. In fact this grand jury conviened
march 2 http://portlandradicle.wordpress.com/201…
well before mayday. This prosecutor has no idea what he's looking for,
these witnesses have no strategy to gather supporters. Sorry RS, just
some bumbling lawmen trying to collect overtime and a few young people
wondering what the fuck is happening to them.
Comments (27) RSS