|Fwd: FYI "Claim of Right Testimony" backstory||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: patty guerrero (pattypaxicloud.com)|
|Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 12:35:45 -0800 (PST)|
This is written by Susu Jeffrey . Please read for her upcoming saonl > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Susu Jeffrey <SUSUJEFFREY [at] msn.com> > Subject: FYI "Claim of Right Testimony" backstory > Date: October 31, 2018 at 10:54:59 AM CDT > To: patty guerrero <pattypax [at] icloud.com> > > > WHY WE GET TO TESTIFY > ABOUT OUR “CLAIM OF RIGHT” > IN A CRIMINAL TRESPASS CASE > > By Susu Jeffrey > > On August 3, 1984, the Minnesota Supreme Court decided State v. Brechon. The > court held a defendant may not be precluded from testifying about his intent > and motives for trespassing. > > The court also held the jury decides the sufficiency of the evidence > presented to establish a claim of right. > > BIRTH OF THE “CLAIM OF RIGHT” > > The “claim of right” in a trespass case is based on breaking into a > house-on-fire to save lives. > > THE HONEYWELL PROJECT 1968-1990 Peace conversion with no loss of jobs. > > During the Viet Nam War, Honeywell Corporation was the largest military > contractor in Minnesota and had sales offices and plants all over the world. > It was one of the top 20 arms manufacturers. > > From 1982-89, more than 2,200 people of peace were arrested for criminal > trespass at demonstrations at the corporate headquarters along I-35W (at 28th > Street East and 5th Avenue South) in Minneapolis. > > I got arrested with nuns, the wife of the Minneapolis chief of police, Marv > Davidov (the soul of the Honeywell Project), the Berrigans, Meridel LeSueur > and (the late) John Brechon, just one of us after whom the Brechon Decision > is named. > > We had three pro bono, obsessed legal talents who locked onto the concept of > allowing motivation to be part of a defendant’s sworn testimony in trespass > cases. Ken Tilsen (Wounded Knee, draft resistance, the Austin Hormel strike), > Mark Wernick (Stop the Powerline across central Minnesota, end nuclear waste > storage at Prairie Island), and attorney Linda Gallant took the case up to > the state Supreme Court—and won! > Mostly we acted as our own lawyers, pro se, since we had hundreds of trials. > Every time we went to court we asked for a jury trial and spoke our prepared > statements to the citizens who were judging us. We labored over our speeches, > poems, military facts, ethical arguments, personal histories. A few times we > were acquitted. > > We served a combined two-years in jails or paid fines or worked at “sentence > to serve,” a clever unpaid work program picking up highway litter or cleaning > municipal sports facilities with youth of color arrested for minor crimes. > > I remember a judge who said her parents escaped fascist Spain, that she > admired us and then announced our punishment. At one of our of small group > trials a defendant told the judge “I don’t see how you can sleep at night.” > He sent her to city jail for three days for contempt of court with “mostly > prostitutes” and a poor woman who got caught for fraud trying to buy diapers > and baby supplies. > > TELLING THE TRUTH > > Sometimes you have to say it over and over again. > > >
- (no other messages in thread)
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.