<html>
<body>
<font size=3><br>
Ninth Circuit Reverses Contempt Order for Winstead<br><br>
Nadia Winstead was notified today, Friday, December 22, that the
Ninth<br>
Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed U.S. District Court Judge
Susan<br>
Illston’s contempt order. In mid November, Winstead’s attorney,
Mark<br>
Goldrosen filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court after Judge
Illston<br>
found Winstead in contempt for refusing to testify before a federal
grand<br>
jury. The reason for the reversal is currently unknown, and
Winstead is<br>
awaiting further details.<br><br>
This is a huge victory for Winstead, but the battle is not over, as
the<br>
case will likely go back before Judge Illston with the Ninth
Circuit’s<br>
decision in mind.<br><br>
More information about the Ninth Circuit Court’s decision will be
released<br>
as it becomes available.<br><br>
Please stay tuned, as future demonstrations and court dates may be<br>
announced on short notice.<br><br>
Background:<br>
In late May ‘05 Winstead and at least 10 other Bay Area activists
were<br>
subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury claiming to be investigating
the<br>
2004 disappearance of Daniel Andreas Sandiego.<br><br>
In August ‘05 Winstead and several other of those subpoenaed to
testify<br>
filed a motion to quash the subpoenas, arguing that the subpoenas
were<br>
unconstitutional. The motion was denied by Judge Illston.
Several weeks<br>
later Winstead and others filed a motion for disclosure of illegal<br>
electronic surveillance. The motion was deemed premature and too
broad<br>
and thus denied as well by Illston.<br><br>
Winstead originally appeared before the grand jury in January ‘06
and<br>
again in August ‘06, each time asserting her Fifth Amendment right
to<br>
remain silent.<br><br>
In September 2006, Winstead’s attorney, Mark Goldrosen, filed a
second<br>
electronic surveillance motion in an attempt force the U.S. government
to<br>
disclose any illegal electronic surveillance that may have
influenced<br>
their decision to subpoena Winstead to the grand jury. The
government<br>
argued that they did not have to reveal their reasons for
subpoenaing<br>
Winstead, garnered illegally or not, and Judge Illston again denied
the<br>
motion.<br><br>
Three weeks later, Winstead was found in contempt by Judge Illston
for<br>
asserting her Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, and ordered to
jail.<br>
Winstead’s attorney then appealed the decision with the Ninth
Circuit<br>
Court of appeals. The Ninth Circuit granted Winstead bail pending
their<br>
decision.<br><br>
This grand jury is one of many, targeting activists, convened around
the<br>
country. It has been identified as one part of the U.S.
government’s<br>
stepped-up efforts to silence dissent among eco and animal
liberationists,<br>
now widely referred to as “The Green Scare”.<br><br>
For more information on grand juries and the “Green Scare”, visit<br>
<a href="http://www.fbiwitchhunt.com/" eudora="autourl">
www.FBIwitchHunt.com<br>
</a></font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">The Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br>
(415) 863-9977<br>
</font><font size=3>
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.freedomarchives.org</a></font></body>
</html>