|
printable version
- js reader version
- view hidden posts
- tags and related articles
by outraged long beach resident
Friday, May. 24, 2002 at 12:56 AM
lb_infoshoppe@yahoo.com 562-434-6934 684 redondo ave long beach,
Long Beach Press Telegram Article on what happened with the last may day trials. Sarah Roberts may face up to a year in prison for doing nothing! Fuck this System!
errorPublished: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 1 convicted in May Day '01 protest By Wendy Thomas Russell Staff writer
LONG BEACH - In the first verdicts to come out of last year's May Day protest on Ocean Boulevard, jurors on Tuesday acquitted two people of failure to disperse and convicted a third of unlawful assembly and wearing a mask with the intent to commit a crime.
Sarah Roberts, 26, the only one convicted, was handcuffed and taken into sheriff's custody after the verdicts were read. Over the strong objection of her attorney, Roberts was also ordered held on $100,000 bail until her sentencing, which is scheduled for Thursday.
The other two defendants, Penelope Gronbeck and Carlos Contreras, were not in Long Beach Superior Court to hear the verdicts. It was a retrial for both.
One juror, who spoke Tuesday on condition of anonymity, said the jury likely would have acquitted all three defendants if it hadn't been for a defense witness, whose testimony - ironically - gave jurors the evidence they needed to convict Roberts.
"I didn't think the prosecution proved its case," the juror said. Until the defense witness took the stand, he said, "I was really convinced that this was going to be an open-and-shut case."
Specifically, he said, the witness made it clear that Roberts wore a mask and was "an active participant" in the May Day demonstration - which, he said, "wasn't just a peaceful protest." Jurors also seemed to accept the defense arguments that Contreras was an onlooker who got too close to the action, and that Gronbeck was an aspiring journalist videotaping the demonstration.
While convicted of two counts, Roberts was acquitted of another five, including riot, rout and conspiracy to commit riot. And the juror interviewed said Long Beach police may not have issued a clear enough order to disperse.
"It was difficult to decide what our (definition) of an unlawful assembly was," he said. "What's our riot, and what's our rout?"
City Prosecutor Tom Reeves, whose office handled the bulk of the cases stemming from the May Day rally, said he didn't agree with the jury's decision but was satisfied with his office's overall conviction rate: 97 percent.
Roberts, Contreras and Gronbeck were the last three defendants of nearly 100 adults and juveniles charged in connection with the protest. Fifty-eight adults took misdemeanor plea bargains, ending in sentences ranging from probation to 45 days in jail, and two took felony plea bargains. In addition, 27 juveniles were charged, although most were released into the custody of their parents, and one case was dismissed by prosecutors, Reeves said.
Last year's demonstration ended in a violent clash between police and protesters after about 125 self-described anarchists, dressed in black and protesting a number of issues, took to the streets of downtown Long Beach behind a banner reading "Capitalism Stole My Life."
Outnumbered nearly 2-1 by police, protesters marched down Pine Avenue and onto Ocean Boulevard, where a dispersal order was followed closely by a hail of rubber bullets fired from police rifles. Prosecutors argued that police fired in response to rocks being thrown at officers. Protesters complained that police used excessive force.
At least 100 people were arrested, and police said they found backpacks filled with claw hammers, ball bearings, M-80s and baggies containing human feces, among other things.
The jurors in the criminal case were never asked to decide who was to blame for the violence, but another jury may get the chance: Last month, eight arrestees filed a proposed class-action lawsuit against the city of Long Beach claiming police brutality.
On Tuesday, Roberts' attorney, Ellen Hammill Ellison, condemned Judge Bradford Andrews for setting her client's bail at $100,000. She said the amount was much too high, given that Roberts was convicted of misdemeanor crimes and had attended court every day of the trial. Ellison also argued that her client would go on a hunger strike if she couldn't get served vegan dishes in jail.
Refusing to lower bail was "the most egregious thing that happened this morning," she said, vowing to take the matter to a higher court. "This is a gentle soul whose main thrust in life is animal rights."
Andrews said the bail was justified given that Roberts has been convicted and faces up to a year in jail and $2,000 in fines.
ttp://www.presstelegram.com/news/articles/0502/22/new03.asp
Report this post as:
|