City
The People vs. the 99 Percent
Judge releases four accused in bank occupation, independent media still on trial
By William Glad
wglad@cityonahillpress.com
Published May 3, 2012 at 5:01 pm

Bradley Allen, a photojournalist for Indybay, is one of the five journalists on trial following the Wells Fargo building occupation. Photo by Nallely Ruiz

Eleven people received arrest warrants in February for their alleged involvement in an occupation of an empty Wells Fargo building on River Street last fall.

On April 25, Judge Paul Burdick ruled there was not enough evidence to bring four of the arrested to trial. But the Santa Cruz District Attorney’s office — referred to as “the People” in court — is still prosecuting the remaining seven.

Five of those on trial are journalists, while the other two are media spokespeople for the occupation. The charges they face include felony conspiracy to vandalize and vandalism charges, as well as two misdemeanor counts of trespassing.

If the remaining defendants go to trial, their cases could set a precedent in local law enforcement that might make it difficult for future unsanctioned events like Occupy Santa Cruz to be documented by alternative news outlets.

“People are really being put under a blanket of fear, and it becomes difficult to report clearly what actually happened,” said Robert Norse, a longtime Santa Cruz activist and one of the independent journalists facing charges.

On Nov. 30 of last year, a group in solidarity with Occupy Santa Cruz took over the vacant Wells Fargo building at 75 River Street with the intent to repurpose the building into a community center. Police posted signs on Dec. 2 warning the protesters they were trespassing and had to leave. On Dec. 3, the protesters were gone.

The accused journalists work for alternative news sources such as Indybay and Free Radio Santa Cruz and argue that they were covering the occupation as a newsworthy event.

The event was covered by other larger local news sources — such as the Santa Cruz Sentinel — but no reporters from these publications face charges.

The DA is primarily relying on police testimony and the arrested photojournalists’ work to demonstrate that the accused entered and remained in the building illegally.

Prosecuting attorney Rebekah Young will have to prove that the defendants continuously occupied the building even after being told by police officers that they were breaking the law and to disperse. In addition, the prosecution has yet to offer substantial evidence of premeditation, crucial to charging an individual with conspiracy.

“It just wasn’t a situation where people were thinking they were really even doing anything wrong. It’s very possible that a lot of people showed up and had no idea what that building was,” said Bradley Allen, an Indybay photojournalist and one of the accused.

Allen said he is not a part of Occupy Santa Cruz, was covering the event in a professional context as he has covered similar events, and did not see or hear any announcements that people were trespassing.

The American Civil Liberties Union, Society of Professional Journalists, National Press Photographers Association and Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press have all issued statements condemning Allen’s prosecution.

Police nationwide have arrested more than 75 journalists covering Occupy-related protests, but most of the cases have been dropped.

“There’s no first amendment exception to criminal acts, and yet virtually no judge that’s had this kind of issue come up in front of him has allowed a prosecution to continue,” said Ben Rice, Allen’s attorney. “They have time and time again thrown out cases against journalists who have been snapped up by law enforcement in the context of covering demonstrations.”

The prosecution has had “chilling” effects on involved individuals and the community, both Allen and Norse said. In addition to imposing great financial expense on both the Santa Cruz city government and those being prosecuted, courtroom proceedings have jeopardized defendants’ jobs, homes and personal relationships.

Despite this challenge for activists and independent journalists nationwide, in the future, Allen said, ““¡Ni un paso atrás! Not one step back, but getting more people to take steps forward, to say that this is wrong and to demand the right to cover the news.”

A rally is planned for May 4 at 1 p.m. at the Santa Cruz courthouse to support those arrested.

Comments
Info for Commenting: Commenter's Code | Privacy Policy
  • Rnorse3

    Burdick’s decision dropping all charges is a highly unusual (and praiseworthy) result in a Preliminary Hearing and shows how concocted the prosecutions’ case is.  It also goes to the competence of prosecutor Young and the strategy of her boss D.A. Bob Lee, who seems to be making a case for the media and certain conservative constituents rather than for a judge and jury. 

    Unfortunately, it’s not the end of the story–either for the four whose charges were dismissed, nor for the rest of us.  The charges were dismissed “without prejudice” which means they can be refiled–which is what the prosecutor immediately promised to do.  This holds not only for the four whose charges were dismissed but for any and all of the Santa Cruz Eleven.

    Though some of the charges were dropped against journalist Allen (and Alex Darocy) at their March Preliminary Hearing, prosecutor Young has refiled them.
     A motion to
    dismiss these charges and argue that selective prosecution fatally
    taints this case will be heard 9 AM in Dept. 6 before Judge Burdick
    on Tuesday May 8th.

    Darocy and Allen’s trials are scheduled
    for May 21st, but the judge will be a different one than dismissed
    the charges against the four defendants as described in the article
    above. Judge Sillman of Monterey County, a visiting judge, will be
    hearing their trial. He will also be hearing the Preliminary Hearing
    of the last five of us as well on May 29th.

    Chillingly, Sillman, unlike Burdick and on even less
    “evidence” than Young presented in Burdick’s court, still
    found enough to forward “conspiracy to trespass”, and two
    trespass charges to trial. No evidence of a prior agreement, no
    indication of the elements of the trespass charges present. The same
    far-fetched aiding-and-abetting just by being present.

    Worse still, Sillman bought Young’s
    toxic conspiracy theory that the two were “the media arm of the
    conspiracy” (by unknown people, against whom no evidence was
    presented) by virtue of their reporting–a frontal attack on First
    Amendment activity.

    Five of us will now face that same
    Judge Sillman on May 29th. Bradley and Alex will face him on May
    21st. (Judge Burdick will be on vacation during that time.)

    Though Judge Burdick’s dismissal of all
    charges is a welcome (and overdue) development, it will not prevent
    Young from refiling any or all charges against all 4, as she has
    promised to do with “Angel” Alcantara and Cameron
    Laurendeau. She has intimated she may also do against Grant Wilson
    and Ed Rector. She has already done this–refiling completely
    unsubstantiated felony vandalism and felony conspiracy to vandalize
    charges against Bradley and Alex.

    Bob Lee’s crazyhouse conspiracy circus
    whirls on.

    Another support benefit will be held on
    Friday May 11th at India JoZe Restaurant 3-6 PM. I urge folks to
    not only support Bradley and Alex on May 8th and come to this benefit
    next week, but also to sign the on-line petition at
    http://www.santacruzeleven.org .

    These charges are part of a darkening
    political sky in Santa Cruz and across the country–an
    unconstitutional crackdown against the Occupy movement by authorities
    who would crush what looks to be the most encouraging protest
    movement in decades.

    http://www.santacruzeleven.org is a good
    first stop for updates on the case as well as
    http://www.indybay.org/santacruz.

    Becky Johnson has written a number of
    hard-hitting articles at
    http://www.beckyjohnsononewomantalking.blogspot.com/search/label/Occupy%20Santa%20Cruz