Judge Rules in Favor of Occupy Protesters, Suspends Trespassing Notices

Comments

1
We're either Citizens, or we're Serfs.

Today a Judge realized we are Citizens.

Occupy THAT!
2
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz................
3
If we shit on their chest and do it non-defiantly with a smile, is that considered legal? That's what the police have been doing to Occupy. What comes around goes around. See video clips of illegal WSP actions last monday on the IowaBoydave Youtube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/IowaBoyDave
4
Fantastic. This is yet another great example of how Occupy has helped so many police agencies tighten up their policies and procedures. We all will benefit in the long from cops learning, little by little, more sophisticated, less clumsy approaches. They've not had such practice in decades. Good for the challengers.
5
Awesome!!
6
@3 no, that's assault.
But they have to arrest you for that, and charge you within 72 hours.

Don't like it?

Move back to Russia.
7
"They're effectively punishing protesters without booking them. You’re being punished with no charges, no arrest, no chance to see a judge or jury of your peers."

Fast forward to next week, where Olympia sees a surge in arrests. It wasnt enough to get a slap on the wrist and ask to not come back for 30 days, now protesters (and deaf journalists) are just begging to be arrested.
8
Good decision.
9
@7:

Fine. Then WSP will just have to go through the hassle of actually, you know DOING THEIR JOBS, and undergoing the onerous process of citing, arresting, charging, booking, and incarcerating individuals, who will then be given their Constitutionally guaranteed day in court, where, in many cases, the charges against them will be thrown out.
10

The part about state parks seems obvious.

Even if they weren't protesting they should be able to camp there as long as they like.

11
@9

Its a sure bet that this will happened. I doubt they'll drop the charges, too much evidence (CCTVs, amateur journalists, etc) to just throw it out and watch them walk right back into the capitol building and repeated EXACTLY what they just got charged for. Maybe they'll drop the 2nd degree charges if you promise not to break the laws again, but chances are, if you do it again, a judge will give you a maximum sentence of 90 days in jail for first degree trespassing.

@10

Most state parts close at dusk, camping is not allowed unless its in designated camping areas that usually require a fee to camp for the day or week. If a WSP says you cant camp there and you refuse a reasonable order to leave, not once but several times, then expect an arrest, if you dont want to go quietly, then expect pepper spray or perhaps being man handled by 3-5 cops as they hog tie you and toss you in the back of the patrol car, naturally while you are screaming "THE WHOLE WORLD IS WATCHING!!!", or "POLICE BRUTALITY!!", and the Fox favorite "IM PREGNANT!".
12
I'm not surprised by this ruling as it seemed pretty obviously unconstitutional to ban a citizen from their own Capitol.
Banning a drunk who regularly takes a dump in the local park's sandbox? Well that's what this ban thing was intended for. Kicking out people who repeatedly made a mess of public places. Of course some GOP apologist will argue that it's the same thing, and camping aside you just can't outright ban the people from their own Capitol.
13
@12

Temporarily banning people from their own capitol building is perfectly constitutional. Court-approved restraining orders barring various repeat offenders from sundry government buildings are not uncommon.

To do this without due process, however, is pretty clearly unconstitutional.
14
The legislators need to smell their constituents.
15
@13 the entire capitol building? Including the places where you get copies of laws and bills?

The problem is that banning a specific person from a specific building that houses many different agencies is one thing, but banning them from the entire capitol complex, which includes most state departmental offices is a whole MESS of worms.

Warn, arrest, charge, hearings, trial. That is the Rule of Law. Not your mickey mouse kangaroo "Banning". With real judges.
16
Well, given that the state and local authorities refuse to listen to the will of the people, maybe some creative person could step up an organize a group in the neighborhood to remove them by force themselves.

Not ME of course, I oppose any such action.