FeedGrand Jury Update (Please Repost)
In February of this year I was served with a subpoena to appear in front of a federal grand jury regarding a protest that I shot in the city of San Francisco on July 8th of 2005. I’ve since exhausted all possible means to quash that subpoena and was served a final subpoena on Monday afternoon [June 12th] ordering me to appear this Thursday, June 15th. I have been compiling all associated documents related to this case at the grand jury resource page.
The case is somewhat complicated, but essentially, I have been ordered to turn over the unpublished video footage of the protest and to submit to examination by the federal grand jury; I feel that this is an attempt to trump the protections afforded to me by the State of California under the state shield law. The assistant US Attorney has asserted that the federal government has jurisdiction in the case because of the vandalism of an SFPD patrol vehicle. The US argues that as the city of San Francisco receives money from the federal government, a portion of the vehicle is, in essence, federal property and thus a federal crime may have occurred. Not only does this logic seem silly, but if unchallenged, will have a deleterious effect on the state protections afforded to many journalists both independent and those that are part of the established media. Just as the police vehicle has some vague monetary connection to the interests of the federal government, so to does any public space including the public roads and sidewalks. In fact, it is my opinion that if this interpretation stands, it has the potential to eviscerate all state protections afforded to journalists and could conceivably have such a dramatic chilling effect on both journalists and their subjects as to effectively kill politically contentious journalism in America. Sure, that’s probably a bit dramatic, but from my perspective this is pretty serious, and I’m curious as to whether there is anyone you know who might be willing to shed light on this story.
It goes against my journalistic ethics to provide the footage to the government, and I have every reason to believe that if I were to comply at that level, I would then be asked to identify various activists that I may or may not know on my video and it goes against every moral fiber in my body to sit back and out people for their political beliefs; I have a decent sense of history and I remember that it was not that long ago that Senator Mc Carthy was holding HUAC meetings and inquiring from scores of people who they knew that might be Communist, and it is for this reason that I need to have all of the information pursuant to my case available to me and have had ample opportunity to discuss and assess all options available with my legal counsel before making any decisions in regards to how I will proceed.
Good luck man, to a point I understand both sides, you have film of vandalism taking place, they want it to prove who commited the crime…. You, don’t want your film used to persecute protestors….
Had it been your car, or a friends car that was vandalised you would gladly hand over the film wouldn’t you? Perhaps you should compromise. Make 16 copies of this film, send them to your friends/family members / etc so that they will never be able to ‘take it away’ then make an edit of the film that ONLY shows the section of the film where the car is vandalised. Protests should be peacefull, once vandalism takes please its no longer a protest but guerilla warfare, and those who act like that should be punished.
I think you’ve missed the point here John. It’s not really about the vandalism, it’s about the federal government overstepping the boundaries of the state government, and potentially to label the protesters as something more to keep some files on…..
Really, you have a point here. If the sole criteria for “Federal Crime” is that there is a smidgen of federal pork rolled into whatever item or location is vandalizes, or the feds helped pay for any bit of the property on which the incident took place… Is there anything that isn’t federal?
I see you’re not saying “the federal government paid for a grant for a few extra patrol cars, of which this was one” but that they contributed money to the city (or police force) in general, and therefore have an interest.
So, would this logic apply to individual citizens, too? If you have been a recipient of a Bush tax break, then the feds have a special investment in your financial and over-all well-being and you are now doubly protected by any federal laws as well as local ones. Assaulting a rich man becomes a federal offense.
There is a big difference between a journalist and an activist. From the way you talk and the story you tell it seems to me that you are most of the second one.
Mind me, I am a very activist prone person, and there is nothing wrong with that. The problem is that journalism is a noble proffesion and you should not call yourself one. A real journalist will go and write a story about a protest. The pinacle is that the story will be factual and it will not be biased. Yours is not factual, you are actually hidding the facts, and you are very biased. So in effect you don’t really have something protected in any way. You are witness to a crime regardless whether you are journalist or not.
So don’t hold your breath for the Pulitzer, and don’t worry – the judge knows how to make people talk, even if you are right which you are not.
To put your mind at ease, I can let you know that the future of democracy does not revolve around you. I know its a kick to think that but it is quite ridiculous.
Martin,
You’re only deluding yourself if you think that mainstream journalists write balanced pieces. Everyone brings their biases to the table and even when you try to write something that is fair and balanced those biases will often show through. It seems to me that it is becoming more and more acceptable to editorialize these days as well.
I corrected a television executive who had extolled the virtue of television news as the “window to the world”. My contention was that the media are the venetian blinds over the window and it depends on which way they’re slanted what view you see out the window.
So, simply because someone exhibits a bias does not rule them out as a journalist. Just look around at what is proffered on any of the networks and tell me that the earmark of a professional journalist is fair and balanced treatement free from bias.
Protesting is fine, when you step over the line and become a vandal, that is a criminal activity… plain and simple. The constitution gives you the right to peacefully assemble . The constitution does not give you the right to destroy public or private property. Criminals are criminals, not activists.
I like protestors, as long as they are peaceful. We don’t know all the facts here, but if you really did vandalize a cop car then you deserve to be held accounted for it, and your rights as a protestor deserved to be severely limited. All the protestors or activists out there who resort to any sort of physical violence are no better than the ones they protest. Didn’t Thoreau, Gandhi, and MLK Jr. teach you anything?
if you are going to get busted for contempt then show some real contempt. take the tape to the courthouse steps, smash it to pieces then arrange the pieces to read FUCK YOU then set it on fire. – that would be cool
First off, *I* did not vandalize anything, nor have I been accused of doing so. I also did not film the incident that is the subject of the grand jury investigation. I have previously submitted a declaration to that effect as well.
You’re doing the right thing. You are a citizen and a member of the independent press, you are not a conscripted federal intelligence officer.
It is obvious that this isn’t about vandalism, they want to know who was at the protest. I think that’s telling and I bet that’s why you’re doing this.
The federal government is overstepping it’s role. Laws on the books or not, the founders of this country, the writers of the constitution, never envisioned that the notes of the press could be forced into the hands of a potentially corrupt government.
The constitution recognized this, that the government would become corrupt, and placed the constitution as a barrier between it and us. Hence “freedom of the press” and other freedoms are spelled out as plainly as possible. Freedom of the press means independence of the press. And using the press, forcing the press to do the work of political hencemen destroys this independence.
Good luck to you. You’re a very courageous guy and we need more like you.
Charles Jillian
http://www.86theDream.blogspot.com
State vs. Federal law sounds like…fun.
Could students who recieved federal loans or grants for college also be under this Pork Protection?
hmm…
First off, from what I’ve read I mostly agree with your cause and see the dangers of blurring the lines between federal and state. I also don’t understand how a SF resident wouldn’t have as much claim to the property as the federal government.
But then I watched the video. While in essence I think you’re right, and I am a firm supporter of protesting (and sometimes a little vandalism is needed [spray painting a messege is hardly "guerilla warfare"]) however…
We are not going to get anywhere if the people protest insist on being idiots. Can you really call for anarchy AND rag on capitlism at the same time? Without government inervention those corporations will be aloud to run amuck, much more then they are today. You don’t have the freedom to choose who provides your power, so we need the govt to step in and ask them to keep it cheap and clean. Same goes for all other utility providers. And if walmart has proven anything it’s that cheap wins over quality,
And what do these people stand for? I didn’t hear a single solution amidst there chanting “fuck yeah” or any ideas on how the world could be a better place. “what do you think of London bombings?” Come on! Is that what we are trying to do, feed people questions so people know they don’t side with the terrorists? What needs to happen is we need to make people aware of the problems AND solutions.
I agree unchecked capatilism is bad, I agree that there is a class struggle that is one of the most important issues facing us right now. But how do you want to change it? What needs to happen? Specifically, what are you upset about? It just seems like shallow adolescent behavior to be lighting off fireworks in the street and chanting “fuck yeah.” You can march up and down the street all day and night chanting pro-anarchist epitaphs and screaming “fuuuucckk” but it’s not going to do anything.
We need to make people think, we need to make them question. All it takes is a small seed of doubt, a little bit of enlightment and people will want to see the light, but if you choose to be as narrow minded and short sighted as they are it’s just going to be two-dimensional arguments of “i know you are but what am i” that seems to be the most popular form of debate these days.
I know this might not be the right place to leave this comment, but this is where I wound up. I’m not trying to attack you,
And by the way, the revolution will NOT be televised.
Witness Sabotage
Just a thought. If you do wind up having to report to the hearings (and don’t wish to be forced into Naming Names), could you effectively sabotage your own usefulness as a witness? Example:
Bailiff: “Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God”?
You (hand on Bible): “No. Rather, I swear that some of the answers I give to this court will be completely untrue, and further swear not to reveal which ones are true and which are not.”
At that point, you either have to:
-Tell some lies during your testimony (which might be considered perjury exept for the fact that you swore you would do so).
-Revoke your first sworn oath and swear anew, which means that your given oaths (including your new one) are useless
-Tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, which means that you’re breaking your oath and therefore are not a reliable source of testimony.
buy valium…
buy valium…
Oh,what a beautiful blog! I like it very much! I’m agreeable to your point of view!
my name is εεΊι I hope to make feiends with you !
order xanax lortab .
Buy hydrocodone online….
Buy hydrocodone online from foreign pharmacies. Hydrocodone online. Hydrocodone online mexican pharmacies. Online hydrocodone or lortab. Buy hydrocodone online. Buy hydrocodone online without a prescription. Online pharmacy hydrocodone….
brand meridia .
Keep up this great resource. best greetings!
Buy xanax without prescription in usa….
Buy xanax without prescription in usa….
crazy sex comic…
The best of crazy sex comic….
brand cialis .
sorry, i didn’t get it…