Privacy Digest

News that can impact your privacy.
Login/Register
What is OpenID?
  • Log in using OpenID
  • Cancel OpenID login
  • Create new account
  • Request new password
Home Blogs MacRonin's blog
    • FAQ
    • Wishlists
    • Contact
    • Categories/RSS

Bookmark Us

Bookmark Privacy Digest 
Bookmark This Page 

Syndicate

Syndicate content
more

Advertisements

Tracking System
Tracking System
Private Detectives
Fleet Management
Hosting

Popular content

Last viewed:

  • P2P Torrent Search Engines Unlawful, U.S. Judge Says
  • Free Press, Lauren Weinstein, Google, and Net Neutrality
  • Proposed DRM for Mass Effect and Spore Still Causing Issues
  • Net Neutrality: FCC Trojan Horse Redux
  • FBI Uses Fake Facebook Profiles To Spy On Suspects
  • New Law Floods California With Medical Data Breach Reports
  • Courts, Congress Shun Addressing Legality of Warrantless Eavesdropping

tags in Topics

Activists Alert Anonymity Companies Copyright Court (US) Databases Data Mining DMCA Editorial EFF Entertainment Exploits Fourth Amendment Government Hmmm ID Infrastructure Law Enforcement Laws Politics Privacy Remember Reports Rights Security Spin Zone Surveillance Telecommunications Tracking
more tags

View blog authority
Congressional Research
Broadcast Flag

Federal Court Rules That D.C. Police Unlawfully Arrested Anti-Bush Protesters On Inauguration Day

Submitted by MacRonin on June 22, 2008 - 11:05am
  • ACLU
  • Activists
  • Court (US)
  • Decisions
  • First Amendment
  • Government
  • Hmmm
  • Law Enforcement
  • Politics
  • President George Bush
  • Remember
  • Rights
  • White House

Federal Court Rules That D.C. Police Unlawfully Arrested Anti-Bush Protesters On Inauguration Day - Via American Civil Liberties Union:

WASHINGTON — A federal court ruled yesterday that the District of Columbia had unlawfully arrested about 70 people during an anti-war and anti-Bush protest march on Inauguration Day 2005. The arrestees are now entitled to a trial to determine the amount of the District's monetary liability to them.

The protest march began at about 11 p.m. on January 20, 2005, after an Anti-Inaugural Concert held on Columbia Road, N.W. About 250 to 300 demonstrators were headed towards the Washington Hilton Hotel, where an Inaugural Ball was in progress, when D.C. police blocked the march and surrounded and arrested about 70 people in an alley, including at least one who had come out of a bar and mingled with the demonstrators as the march passed by.

While the demonstrators marched peacefully, some individuals in the area did commit crimes, such as spray-painting on buildings, pulling newspaper vending machines into the street, and breaking windows; rocks and bottles were thrown at police cars. But the police were unable to identify the people who committed those crimes. Instead, they arrested everyone in the alley for rioting, and subsequently charged them with parading without a permit, though they never had given any warning that the parade had to end or any opportunity for marchers to disperse peacefully.

In a decision released yesterday, Judge Ellen S. Huvelle found that the police violated the constitutional rights of the protesters by arresting them without having evidence linking any individual person to any crime. She explained that "a peaceful political protester may not be punished for failing to cease his protected activity simply because others associated with the assembly may have committed illegal acts," and that "no reasonable officer could have believed that there was probable cause to order a mass arrest of plaintiffs for parading without a permit absent fair notice and an opportunity to comply."

"We brought this case to vindicate an important principle," said Arthur Spitzer, Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of the National Capital Area, which filed the case jointly with the D.C. Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild. "When people march peacefully in the street to support a political cause they should not be arrested. If some people commit crimes, those people should be arrested, not their neighbors. If police have a good reason to stop a march, they must give marchers an opportunity to disperse, not simply arrest them."

Susan Dunham of the NLG added, "The court's ruling reminds the police that the criminal acts of a few persons at a demonstration do not make all demonstrators guilty of rioting and, most important, that demonstrators have a right to continue protesting peacefully despite the misconduct of others near or among them, unless police for good reason order an end to the demonstration."

The decision in Carr v. District of Columbia is at: https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/Opinions.pl?2008

(Read Original Article - Via American Civil Liberties Union.)

Bookmark/Search this post with:
  • Twitter Twitter
  • Digg Digg
  • StumbleUpon StumbleUpon
  • Technorati Technorati
  • del.icio.us del.icio.us
  • Facebook Facebook
  • Furl Furl
  • LinkedIn LinkedIn
  • Yahoo Yahoo
  • MacRonin's blog
  • Add new comment

Recent blog posts

  • Free Press, Lauren Weinstein, Google, and Net Neutrality
  • New Malware Imitates Browser Warning Pages
  • Game Publishers Using Stealth P2P Clients
  • Nasty Data-Stealing Bug Haunts Internet Explorer 8
  • UAE Man-in-the-Middle Attack Against SSL
  • The British Tabloid Phone-Hacking Scandal
  • Murdoch Reporters’ Phone-Hacking Was Endemic, Victimized Hundreds
  • ‘Evil’ Eric Schmidt Debuts in Video Targeting Google Privacy
  • Righthaven's Brand of Copyright Trolling
  • New law review article: "Applying the Fourth Amendment to the Internet: A General Approach"
more

Performancing Metrics

Compilation © Copyright 1997-2010 Paul Hardwick, with Web Hosting provided by MacRonin.com.