<html>
<body>
<h2><b>
<a href="http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/animal-rights-activists-indicted-as-terrorists-for-home-protests/1657/">
Animal Rights Activists Indicted as “Terrorists” For Home
Protests</a></b></h2><font size=3>Mar 19th, 2009 by
<a href="http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/author/will-potter/">Will
Potter</a> <br>
</font><font size=1>
<a href="http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/animal-rights-activists-indicted-as-terrorists-for-home-protests/1657/" eudora="autourl">
http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/animal-rights-activists-indicted-as-terrorists-for-home-protests/1657/<br>
<br>
<br>
</a></font><font size=3>When four animal rights activists were arrested
under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, it was unclear how prosecutors
would proceed, and what specific accusations the activists would face.
Now, the
<a href="http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/wp-content/Images/aeta4_indictment.pdf">
government indictment,</a> available here for the first time, makes it
strikingly clear that prosecutors intend to use terrorism laws to target
First Amendment activity. <br><br>
The “AETA 4,”Joseph Buddenburg, Maryam Khajavi, Nathan Pope, and Adriana
Stumpohave been indicted for “conspiracy” to violate the
<a href="http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/aeta">Animal Enterprise
Terrorism Act</a>. As justification of the charge, the indictment lists
three specific acts:
<ol>
<li><b>A protest on October 21, 2007, at an animal researcher’s home.</b>
The government says this amounts to “threats, criminal trespass,
harassment and intimidation.” In the criminal complaint, the FBI said
that on this date “protesters trespassed onto Professor Number One’s
front yard and rang his doorbell several times. The group was making a
lot of noise and chanting animal rights slogans (“1, 2, 3, 4 open up the
cage door; 5, 6, 7, 8, smash the locks and liberate; 9, 10, 11, 12,
vivisectors go to hell”)…”
<li><b>A protest on January 27, 2008, at an animal researcher’s home.</b>
The government says this amounts to “threats, harassment, and
intimidation.” In the criminal complaint, the FBI said that on this date
approximately 11 individuals demonstrated at the homes of multiple
researchers. “At each residence, the individuals, dressed generally in
all black clothing and wearing bandanas over their nose and mouth,
marched, chanted, and chalked defamatory comments on the public
sidewalks…”
<li><b>Use of the Internet.</b> They allegedly “used the Internet to find
information on bio-medical researchers at the University of California at
Santa Cruz.”
</ol><br>
Even more telling, though, is what is <b>not</b> listed in the
indictment. In the
<a href="http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/fbi-surveillance-activist-leafleting/1096/">
criminal complaint and the FBI press release</a>, the government
mentioned the above allegations along with two other incidentsthe only
two incidents even approaching a “gray area” between protected speech and
illegal conduct.
<ul>
<li>At one protest attended by the defendants, a researcher “struggled
with one individual and was hit with a dark, firm object,” according to
the FBI. (February 24, 2008)
<li>A stack of fliers titled “Murderers and torturers alive & well in
Santa Cruz July 2008 edition” was found at a local coffee shop, Café
Pergolesi. The fliers said “we know where you live we know where you work
we will never back down until you end your abuse” and listed home
addresses and telephone numbers. The FBI used video surveillance to
allegedly link the flier distribution to the defendants. (July 29, 2008)
</ul><br>
Now, to be very clear, the details in an indictment aren’t the final word
in any criminal case. They never reveal too much of the prosecution’s
hand. They do, however, lay the backbone of the government’s case and put
the prosecution’s best foot forward. <br><br>
Omitting the most controversial, potentially-illegal activity, and
instead focusing on protests that involved chalking slogans and chanting,
sends a very clear message of where this is all heading. This case and
others like it are not about underground groups like the Animal
Liberation Front, they are not about “violence,” they are not about the
real potential for violence.<br><br>
They are about using the “War on Terrorism” to chip away at basic First
Amendment rights and criminalize dissent.<br><br>
<br><br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>