[Ppnews] San Diego Grand Jury

[PPnews at freedomarchives.org]

   from san diego indymedia, written by me:


Today, myself, Danae and David Agranoff went into the Grand Jury room
and refused to answer questions based on our First Amendment rights to
free association and right to privacy.
   I read the following statement to the Grand Jury:
   "Based on the advice of counsel, I decline to answer any questions
because I believe:
   - Answering questions results in an infringement of the First Amendment
rights of freedom of association, right to privacy and right to seek
redress.
- Compliance with the subpoena is oppressive and unreasonable.
- The grand jury is not investigating a crime but conducting general
intelligence gathering on individuals and on the animal rights movement.
- Questions are not being asked in good faith.
- The subpoena is for the purpose of harassment and intimidation
- Questions are an attempt at setting up a perjury trap.
- The questions are based on unlawful electronic intercepts."
   We were then sent to see Judge Gonzalez at 4:15pm.  The prosecution made
the request that the hearings be sealed, so only one witness at a time
spoke to the judge.  In the courtroom were the two prosecutors, our
lawyers, Danae, myself and David, and about 10 FBI agents.  Myself, Danae
and our lawyers were asked to leave while the judge heard Jeremy
Warren's motions.  The Union tribune reporter who showed up late, which
was on time since the prosecution moved the hearing up fifteen minutes,
said that the sealing was very unusual for a contempt hearing.
   Then, in a rather unusual move, the judge in the case has given us and
our lawyers two weeks to file a brief on what exactly our first
amendment objections to the subpoenas are.  I see this as a huge victory
and as a validation of our objections to this process.
   The judge could've just put us in jail for not testifying today.  There
were marshalls in the court room with us, but she decided to give us
time to file a formal brief and outline what our objections are.  There
is very little legal precedent for the First Amendment rights of Grand
Jury witnesses, so it is expected by some that she will reject our
objections to the subpoenas.
   Also, our lawyers say that the government may be using illegal wiretaps
and the judge said that they have to tell her of all types of
surveillance they're using.
   Again, I see this as a huge victory for now.  Thank you to everyone who
has supported us through this.  We had a lot of people waiting outside to
support us while we were in court and while we were in the Grand Jury room.
   The judge said that she read the story in the Union Tribune, which had
numerous quotes from David and myself, so it seems that the work of our
support committee really paid off.  The reporter from the Union Tribune,
Onell Soto, was trying hard to get into the hearing.  He even sort of
snuck in at one point and the hearing had to be stopped because he was
there, so the judge, the prosecutors and all the FBI agents involved are
aware that their actions are being watched an are under public scrutiny.
Keep up the good work!

The Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
(415) 863-9977
www.freedomarchives.org 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/ppnews_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20050705/e1c31986/attachment.htm>