Breaking: Judge Rejects "Riot" Charges Against Amy Goodman in North Dakota
Source: Democracy NOW!
WEB EXCLUSIVE - October 17, 2016
A North Dakota judge today refused to authorize riot charges against award-winning journalist Amy Goodman for her reporting on an attack against Native American-led anti-pipeline protesters.
This is a complete vindication of my right as a journalist to cover the attack on the protesters, and of the publics right to know what is happening with the Dakota Access pipeline, said Goodman. "We will continue to report on this epic struggle of Native Americans and their non-Native allies taking on the fossil fuel industry and an increasingly militarized police in this time when climate change threatens the planet."
Read more: http://www.democracynow.org/2016/10/17/breaking_riot_charges_against_amy_goodman
Fantastic News!
MADem
(135,425 posts)DK504
(3,847 posts)Throw in some abuse of power with refusal to accept the 1st Amendment makes for fascism. Nice to see the judge slap the moron cops down.
Can he stop the dog attacks on protestors?
Gothmog
(145,291 posts)still_one
(92,213 posts)The idiot prosecutor who brought this up should be suspended
underpants
(182,826 posts)ananda
(28,865 posts)She's the best journalist out there!
bananas
(27,509 posts)The State's Attorney didn't do this on his own.
Mike Pence should be sent to a federal penitentiary, not to the Vice Presidency.
christx30
(6,241 posts)holding a microphone and asking questions. And the typing. Oh, God, the typing.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Montauk6
(8,077 posts)LiberalLovinLug
(14,174 posts)Just wondering. Were there others that were charged for "rioting" just for being there? Those that do not have a high public profile, and are not a part of a well known news show that could embarrass the corporate industrial complex?
Fahrenthold451
(436 posts)I'll be willing to bet that your state has a ridiculous statute like the ND riot statute. Look at it.
12.1-25-01. Inciting riot.
1. A person is guilty of an offense if he:
a. Incites or urges five or more persons to create or engage in a riot; or
b. Gives commands, instructions, or directions to five or more persons in
furtherance of a riot.
2. "Riot" means a public disturbance involving an assemblage of five or more persons
which by tumultuous and violent conduct creates grave danger of damage or injury to
property or persons or substantially obstructs law enforcement or other government
function.
Take a look at that substantially obstructs a government function. What the hell does that mean anyway? It means the government has a lot of power to arrest journalists.
Equinox Moon
(6,344 posts)If you are new to DU, welcome.
Divine Discontent
(21,056 posts)neeksgeek
(1,214 posts)Great news!
Equinox Moon
(6,344 posts)niyad
(113,325 posts)Divine Discontent
(21,056 posts)- - - Republicans aren't sending their best. They're sending criminals. They're sending rapists - - -
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)Achilleaze
(15,543 posts)To have ruled otherwise would have been a blatant display of anti-democracy.
Equinox Moon
(6,344 posts)Warpy
(111,267 posts)but kudos to the judge for dissolving the adhesive so quickly.
wordpix
(18,652 posts)Keep doing your thing