This is a tweaked, mildly tweaked, version of what I posted at Substack on Monday.
Per the header, the second half of the header is my concern as much as anything.
This is an expanded version of a long, multi-link restack note I had to Ken Klippenstein’s piece on the sentencing.
Maybe Ken didn’t mean to come off as whitewashing one of the two judges presiding over the case with this:
Even
the presiding judge, Trump appointee Mark Pittman, seemed to grasp the
danger of treating belief as evidence. He asked Shideler whether owning a
copy of Mein Kampf made him a fascist, or Das Kapital
a communist. “Not unless it’s consistent with your other behavior,”
Shideler answered each time. When the judge noted he himself owned
“quite a bit” of Antifa literature, the room got the point.
But, without further context, it sure feels that way.
Speaking
here from Tex-ass, yes, this is a fucked-up verdict. That said, the
“Prairieland Eight” maybe didn’t have the best of legal representation? I
don’t know.
That said, Ken omits two important details.
First, per an Associated Press story, Pittman was not the only judge presiding over the case. That’s a serious omission, as AP details what the other judge said:
U.S.
District Judge Reed O’Connor, one of two judges overseeing the
proceedings, said what happened wasn’t a protest but “an assault on
democracy.” All but one of the eight defendants sentenced Tuesday were
convicted on terrorism charges.
Also, also, Judge Pittman wasn’t as non-biased as Ken makes it look. See here.
After spending over seven months in multiple jails across North Texas, the Prairieland Defendants
finally had their federal trial start on Tuesday, February 17. But
then, as soon as the first defense attorney started asking questions to
the prospective jurors, presiding Judge Mark Pittman declared a mistrial.
Why? Because attorney MarQuetta Clayton, the only Black woman among the
defense lawyers and counsel for defendant Maricela Rueda, was wearing a t-shirt featuring civil rights leaders of the past. Judge Pitman also took issue with Ms. Clayton’s voir dire questions, which reasonably probed jurors’ feelings about protest.
As experienced defense attorneys, we can attest that Ms. Clayton did nothing wrong.
Despite both the prosecution and the defense opposing more delays,
Judge Pittman nevertheless declared a mistrial and dismissed the entire
jury pool. Significantly, immediately before the judge’s decision,
prospective jurors had overwhelmingly expressed criticism of ICE, and
several took the position that the Second Amendment extends to protests –
opinions with which the judge appeared to take issue.
That’s just the beginning of a whole shitload of shit from Pittman. Sorry, Ken, but I got that link after 30 seconds of search.
LOTS more about Pittman at the same link:
Judge Pittman refused to allow local counsel, George Lobb, to represent defendant Maricela Rueda, threatening to hold him in contempt for 90 days if he did not withdraw from his role as her attorney. This led Rueda to hire Ms. Clayton as her attorney.
Judge Pittman attempted to place limits on defense objections, allowing only one defendant’s lawyer to object during the prosecution’s case. After a motion from attorney Leigh W. Davis, counsel for defendant Ines Soto, the judge is now limiting duplicative objections which, practically, will still limit defendant-specific arguments.
In a pretrial hearing, Judge Pittman fined attorneys Patrick McLain, Brian Bouffard and Bradley Sauer, counsel for defendant Zachary Evetts, $500 each
for filing a discovery motion, effectively discouraging other defense
attorneys from filing motions in the case. It is not only the right of
counsel to file pre-trial motions; attorneys are obligated by the Rules
of Professional Conduct to competently and diligently represent their
clients. This ruling by Judge Pittman arguably violates defendants’
Sixth Amendment rights and puts counsel in an untenable position with
respect to their independent professional ethical duties.
Defense attorneys have been allotted only eight minutes
each for their opening statements, and 35 hours total across nine
defendants to put up witnesses. Judge Pittman has justified these time
limit restrictions in a case where several defendants are facing life in prison by citing “other pressing matters on the court’s docket.”
Since the mistrial, Judge Pittman has moved the trial to a smaller room in the Federal Courthouse in Fort Worth, and assigned an overflow room for the public to observe in Dallas, more than 30 minutes drive away.
Most recently, Judge Pittman ordered that only the Court will be allowed to ask questions to the jury during voir dire.
Ken notes Pittman is a Trump appointee. Reed O’Connor? Shrub Bush, in one of his worst picks, and known as a wingnut-desired judge in venue shopping.
That
said, an even bigger background problem is that the federal court
system ONLY has judicial sentencing. Unlike most state courts, a jury
has no part in sentencing. Many “John Doe” readers may not know that.
"There ought to be a law," indeed, changing that.
That said, to expand more beyond my quick hit?
I totally don't like the attempt to criminalize protesting. Totally.
And, I'm not using the word "but" to invite the cheap psychology hot take.
"That said" ....
I've been on record in this space since Trump 1.0 that "antifa" often sounds pretentious, often just by the word itself.
I've also been on record in this space that "antifa" often seems to be an excuse for Black Bloc type "wilding." I called them out for the first time just seven months into Trump's first term. Before COVID. Before the worse Trump 2.0. I said they were the Black Bloc rebranded and I refused to use the cutesy word. I said no again to violence vis-a-vis Andy Ngo in summer 2019. About 15 months later, I called out their ignorance of local neighborhoods, especially when being nearly all-white marchers. I called out the anarchist angle of many of them (probably actually pseudo-anarchist) in 2023. Last year, per the point of contention that started this piece, I mildly called out Ken over his take on on the cancellation of a No Kings protest in Minnesota after the Vance Boelter shootings. And, I called out Ken a bit more last fall for his framing of this "movement" as unorganized.
Related? Some of the arrestees were in the left-wing gunz world. As I said nearly six years ago about Garrett Foster being killed? I'll take a pass on that, too.
I won't let you have your cake and eat it too. You're either a movement, which implies at least attempts at organization, or you're 100 percent cosplaying.
Let's go further.
First, if you're going to be serious protestors, not play-actors, or to use the modern term, cosplayers, know who you're playing with.
And I said playing "with" not "against."
If you don't know that someone will not only pack heat to a protest site but use it, like top defendant Benjamin Hanil Song did, you'd better make yourself better informed before the moment of truth. Even with over-the-top sentencing set aside, you're still going to be tried as an accessory to any actual gun-related crimes. And, per KERA, Song was one of the core/original six.
As for the other defendants' claims in the case? Vandalizing property is itself NOT a "noise protest," per the Wikipedia page. I don't like it when Earth First does it, even just to logging equipment and definitely don't like it when it spikes trees. And, on the fireworks? Shooting them in the air? One thing. At the facility and at a guard tower, another.
Also from there? If you don't know that people in your group are likely to easily cop a plea, you'd better find that out in advance, too.
The link about O'Connor was from the National Lawyers Guild. Per Wiki, it objected to the arrests.
Wrong. I'll agree if you object to some of the specific charges, but not the arrests per se.
I'm not a "law and order" leftist. I am a skeptical leftist who has a brain. And a lot of people here did not.
And, with a long history here on Blogger, that's why it will remain my primary commentary platform for now.
