Waco Judge Dismisses Charges against "Crawford 5"

[sonias]

This is fabulous news! Yeah for TCRP and the Crawford 5!!!
Moderators please note that this is a press release so we can
put the whole thing up. They don't have it up on their site yet, it
was sent out in e-mail.

Thanks

Sonia
--------------------

TEXAS CIVIL RIGHTS PROJECT
For immediate release: CONTACT: Andrea Buckley

July 9, 2004 [phone] x 102
Waco Judge Dismisses Charges against "Crawford 5"

Court finds City of Crawford violated the First Amendment

Austin – The Texas Civil Rights Project today applauded the decision of a McLennan County Judge who on Friday dismissed all charges against five community activists arrested and convicted in Crawford, TX last year for violating the city’s anti-protestor ordinance.

Judge Tom L. Ragland issued a ruling late Friday that dismissed all charges against the so-called "Crawford 5" because the ordinance "was overly broad on its face and … the manner in which it was implemented and enforced by the City of Crawford … contravenes the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America."

This decision comes after a Crawford Municipal Court jury found the Crawford 5 guilty in February 2004 and ordered three of them to pay the maximum $500 fine allowed by law. The two remaining protestors received a $300 and $200 fine.

The Texas Civil Rights Project represented the Crawford 5: Tricia Major (Dallas church secretary), Amara Malizewski (AmeriCorps volunteer in Austin), Ken Zarifis (Austin 8th grade school teacher), Amanda Jack (volunteer with Austin refugee house), and Michael Mashicek (Crawford peace activist).

"This is a great victory for free speech in the President’s own backyard," said TCRP Director Jim Harrington. "This decision guarantees that the free speech rights of other protestors will not be silenced by the City of Crawford."

In May 2003, the "Crawford 5" were on their way to demonstrate at President George W. Bush’s ranch against the war in Iraq and were arrested by the Chief of Police as they drove through Crawford on the way to the ranch. After participating in protests in Austin, the five individuals traveled to Crawford with the intent to protest at the ranch, taking advantage of the media present for Bush’s meeting with the Australian Prime Minister.

When the protestors’ cars turned onto Route 317 on their way to the ranch, they met a blockade by Crawford city police and McLennan County sheriff deputies. Police Chief Donnie Tidmore announced from his vehicle that "we have a city ordinance here against protesting" and gave people three minutes to get out of the area. While most of the group managed to leave within the allotted three minutes, some still remained outside of their cars, reloading signs, but preparing to leave. The Crawford 5 were arrested for violation of the Parades and Processions ordinance and held overnight in the McLennan County jail.

"We feel vindicated by this decision and are glad the Court agrees with us that the City of Crawford violated our First Amendment rights," said Crawford 5 member Amanda Jacks.

Malcolm Greenstein of Austin and Isaac Harrington of TCRP also served as counsel in the case.

For more information, please call Jim Harrington, at phone above, or cell (512-771-1759).
-----------------

(edited to fix quote typos)

[amber dog democrat]

1. Awesome

My congratulations. What will the town do next? - take itl to the Court of Appeals?

[silverlib]

2. This is wonderful news -

The best news I've had today. This was such a injustice. It should have never happened. I am glad they are finally vindicated.

Thanks for posting.

[NoPasaran]

3. Great news!

"we have a city ordinance here against protesting" doesn't sound like the sort of thing Thomas Jefferson would ever expect to be said in this country.

[GOPisEvil]

4. Awesome! Great work by the TCRP!

My money is well-spent! :thumbsup:

[sonias]

5. Here's one story link

Charges dismissed against anti-war protesters
http://www.wacotrib.com/news/content/gen/ap/TX_Protesters_Bush.html
(snip)
The ordinance required 15 days notice and a $25 permit fee before the town's police chief could issue a permit for a protest within city limits. Crawford officials have since amended the ordinance to require a seven-day notice.
(/snip)


(snip)
Crawford City attorney Brad Newsom testified Thursday that the ordinance had an unwritten clause requiring the police chief to talk to him before denying a permit, the Waco Tribune-Herald reported in its Friday editions.
(/snip)

Unwritten clauses, WTF? Bet you he's going to be in a load of trouble for revealing that little secret. The Good Old Buy system is alive and well in Texas. Wonder if Newsom is another one of those bu$h cousins.

Sonia

[Lisa0825]

6. That's GREAT news!!!!!:-)

Thanks for posting!:-)

:hi:

[liveoaktx]

7. But... why should they have to give 7 days notice and cough up 25 smacks?

Free speech, my eye. What constitutes a protest? If one person went to Crawford and stood on the sidewalk, would he or she get arrested because didn't work out it out 7 days beforehand?

I can understand a protest that encompasses a lot of people. I went to Crawford for an anti-war protest earlier this year where a lot of people showed up and marched through downtown.

But five people?

[sonias]

8. Hey Dac_76!

VelmaD and I were in the anti-war protest in Crawford too. That group, of course had their parade permit. This case is from 2003. But you are absolutely right, any single person should be able to stand on any public property (sidewalk, right of way on road etc) and practice their first amendment anywhere in this country. The whole damn country is a first amendment zone. This frigging administration and their thugs around the country keep forgetting that.

I am so thankful that Judge did the right thing!

Sonia

[liveoaktx]

9. Question is, at what point does *free speech* require a permit?

Suppose it was 2 people. Would 2 people on a corner require a 7 day notice?
Saying that I can understand a large protest such as the one in the spring requiring a permit. But where is the line drawn otherwise?

[Brazosboomer]

10. Same deal here -

In the 2002 Governor's race, a man was arrested while holding a Tony Sanchez sign in Missouri City (Fort Bend County). I wrote about it in the local newspaper http://www.brazosriver.com/gilbert.htm (His last name is Sanchez but is no relation to the candidate.) They got him for violating the city's sign ordinance.

The trial in city court ended in a mistrial when one of the city inspectors chatted with a juror during a break. The lawyer appealed it to district court and, of course, it withered there after all the negative publicity.

I still stand by my statement at that time: It seems to me that the problem with America is not that there are too many people on street corners making a political statement. The problem with America is that there aren’t enough people on the street corners making political statements.

[sonias]

11. I hadn't heard about that case Brazosboomer

That is totally wrong. So is the case dead? Does Gilbert still have that $3,000 fine hanging over his head?

Glad his lawyer is helping him out pro-bono, but if you know him he should also contact the ACLU and TCRP. Even if they can't help him directly, they may be able to get some media attention to this. That sign law they have should not apply to people standing with a sign. That sounds like a clear 1st amendment right violation.

But just so you know, it's not just Missouri City and Crawford and other small cities and towns, it happens right here in big cities like Austin, TX too. We have a case on appeal right now too, against the City of Austin for 1st amendment violations which TCRP is handling too. All over this country people are just too willing to believe and accept the status quo, and that the president is always right, and that dissent is unpatriotic. We absolutely have to get people to understand that open discussion, disagreement and dissent is the most patriotic thing you can do in a democracy.

Thanks for the story and I wish Gilbert all the luck in the world. I'm proud of him too.

Sonia

[Brazosboomer]

12. I'm happy to report ---

Sonia - I'm happy to report that the statute of limitations has passed and Gilbert is off the hook. The District Attorney just sat on it, not wanting the bad publicity.

However, the lawyer is still fighting the city sign ordinance, and Gilbert is going to try to get cited again this November by standing with a Kerry / Edwards sign on the same corner. I will go with him with a camera and sound equipment.

I'll send your comments to Gilbert. He'll appreciate them so much. Thanks.