You are here
Home > Posts tagged "Denver"

Judicial reform activist Bruce Doucette is next Denver sovereign to face joint FBI JTTF IRS & Colorado AG show trial

DENVER, COLORADO- Into the second week of the Doucette sovereignty trial you can't help but imagine yourself attending the burning of a medieval heretic. There but for a modicum more caution than courage go I.   Sovereign Bruce Doucette and his nine co-conspirators, who prosecutors allege constituted a "criminal enterprise", were saying what most know to be true about our nation's corrupt justice system. Their attempts to bring reform however sparked the fear and wrath of the targeted cronies, who now lash back with all the authoritarian muscle with which they conduct their misdeeds. Small surprise, obviously. That's why you and I are standing around the fire and not in it. But seeing the fire being fueled by the FBI, its Joint Terrorism Task Force partners, and Colorado's First Deputy Attorney General himself, onlookers dare not show sympathy for the heretics. If you think this is an exaggeration, you haven't been watching the Denver "paper terrorist" enterprise trials. Last December, the first two sovereigns were convicted of racketeering, conspiracy, etc, and given 36 and 22 year sentences. At their ages, that's LIFE. Two remain to be tried, including Doucette. The rest took plea deals and were given only probation. This was in exchange for being made to "renounce allegiance to the sovereignty movement" and "to cease criticizing" judge whoever. In constitutional days, criticism was free speech. And belief was a fundamental right. If you can reduce a prison sentence to probation by merely swearing fealty to the dominant authority, the real problem law enforcement has with these paper crimes is the First Amendment. Today Colorado is giving life sentences for heresy. Injustice Systemic corruption among judges, sheriffs, district attorneys, and petty bureaucrats is no mere conspiracy theory. Someone is filling America's booming for-profit prisons. Someone is enboldening cops to shoot rather than arrest. Who do you think is running the courts which prey entirely on the disadvantaged? In Montaigne's day, even aristocrats feared the courts. America's innovation was to ensure the legal system benefits the rich, while pretending to serve The People. And administered by clowns who swore an oath to the people. For laughs. Oaths Doucette and his sovereign reformers discovered that many of these cronies had become so brash, they had dispensed with the oaths of office which they were constitutionally required to make. More hadn't even posted bonds to secure said oaths. Bonds are mandated by the constitution to hold public officials accountable to their subjects over whom they wield disproportunate power. But Doucette & co soon found that pointing out the missing oaths and bonds fell on deaf ears. Bond-less, oath-less, unaccountable despots can simply bang the gavel and ignore you. While the more clever, if less principled, among us learn to exploit a crooked system, and the rest of us gnash our teeth in frustration, the Colorado sovereigns were foolhardy enough to take on the system with its own medicine. Liens Doucette and crew enterprised to serve official looking financial liens on the corrupt office holders, for monetary amounts corresponding to how long

Meow Wolf’s new Denver development is urban predation in sheep’s clothing.

DENVER, COLO- Alternatively, Santa Fe alt-art venue Meow Wolf is URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN CAT'S CLOTHING. Here's the scam: Laud an arts collective of "creative types". Let them pitch an arts space project to city planners for which you'll supply the ownership investment. Let their non-profit creative-class cred prompt city leaders to provide otherwise unavailable land and the tax incentives and exclusions which come to cultural projects. Let them lead community fundraising to support art etc etc. You buy the land, you own the building, and you give them a 20-year lease. Their rent is subsidized by more community and city support. Cha-ching. In the end, you've got another property, where you mightn't been able lacking eminent domain. And you've roped in long-term tenants whose rent checks are backed by taxpayers. When your cronies lobby the city against that public support and their project is a bust, or when the lease expires, your sky is the limit! How can you lose? Normally you pull this scam on locals, but art communities have their own MBA grads now. So how to subvert urban artists? Bring your own hicks. In Denver, developers are using a New Mexico based band of bohemians called Meow Wolf as their shill intermediaries. Meow Wolf is a sort of Cirque du Soleil meets Halloween haunt house, in Santa Fe, who secured their own "permanent" leased space only last year with the backing of Game-of-Thrones creator George RR Martin. It's the reverse of course, because Meow Wolf attracted the public subsidies for the pulp author turned property developer, who keeps the building. Now someone has decided Meow Wolf can franchise their black-light immersive fun-houses everywhere that low-brow passes for art. For 2018, Meow Wolf has rolled Denver for a new construction downtown. Except no, they and their public support get only a LEASE. Flush with praise for their success, the Meow Wolves admit they're working on simultaneous metropolises across the west, even as they appear so fresh off the boat they hardly know what they're doing! They don't, but their landlords do. Those crazy creatives!

Activist Corey Donahue is free, despite supra-judicial ploys to halt his release.

DENVER, COLORADO- Occupy Denver veteran Corey Donahue was released from county jail on Thursday, thwarting two surprise court filings to keep the activist in custody for additional months. Donahue had negotiated a global plea deal to serve concurrent sentences for his outstanding charges of inciting public protests in 2011 and 2012. Yeah, those aren't crimes, but when you're an involuntary guest of the Denver jail, your stamina for disputing bogus accusations wanes with every bogus meal. Municipal court judges are as vindictive and perfunctory as the petty officials pressing the original charges. Engaging that crowd is not reciprocal, so it's especially unrewarding if it means enduring protracted incarceration. Having cleared his cases and completed the good-behavior obligations of a 9-month sentence for the nut-tap crime, Donahue was due to be released Thursday. But that morning, the Lindsey-Flanagan justice center activated an additional 2012 case which lawyers had been prevented from negotiating because the Division-3D judge withheld it from the docket. Neither private attorneys nor public defenders had been able to compel 3D to address that lingering case number. On Thursday the case mysteriously engaged... As a result, on Thursday Denver sheriffs demanded a large cash bond and they scheduled Corey for an in-custody court appearance the next day. When funds were rushed to the bonding office, an even larger bond was imposed for a 2011 case specifically stipulated to have been dismissed by the terms of Donahue's global plea. Can they fucking do that? No. And yes, everyday. Municipal court despots are not accountable even to their consciences. We've seen Lindsey-Flanagan chief justice Martinez confabulate on the witness stand in federal court to suit his duplicitous machinations, and his minions embellished on his lead. Usually their victims, locked in the Van Cise-Simonet Detention Center across the plaza, are powerless to decline their sadism. Clearing up this clerical error would take until after Christmas, so it seemed more in the holiday spirit to give Denver their blood money and take the courthouse to task afterward, from the relative comfort of being out of custody. WTF.

Denver used protection orders to curb mobility of Occupy protesters in 2011

DENVER, COLORADO- Activist Corey Donahue's 11-11-2011 protest case is still outstanding. The recently surrendered fugitive is charged with inciting a riot in the first months of the Occupy Denver encampment, when supporters crowded a police cruiser and began to rock it in protest of Corey's third arrest. Clouding this nostalgic look back at DPD's mishandling of mass demonstrations are the quasi-legal steps the city took to constrain the protest. It turns out Corey's felony riot charges were used to convince a Denver court to grant protection orders to two state troopers who considered themselves personal victims of Occupy Denver's assertive tactics. As a resut, Corey was prevented from leading demonstrations into areas when those officers were deployed, and he didn't know which those officers were. The measure was of dubious legality and so far remains shrouded in disinformation. Were two officers "seriously injured", as news outlets reported, in the so-called riot of Nov 11? Except for their official statement, no evidence was ever provided by DPD. What were the injuries and who were the officers? Can police invoke the protection of a blanket injunction to stop public demonstrations whenever they want? Can a police department enforce protection orders and pretend its subjects can remain anonymous? These are the questions which Denver police face as they push charges against one of their most outspoken antagonists. Can law enforcement officers unknown to a defendant file for restraining orders against the public they serve and protect? Can police require that ordinary citizens maintain a prescribed distance from them in a public space? Encamped on the grounds of the capitol, at the peak of an ongoing protest movement, Corey Donahue was in no position to push back with a legal challenge. Denver has since used an even more abusive method, designating “area restrictions” to keep active protest leaders out of places like the state capitol, Civic Center Park, and 16th Street Mall. DPD cite the arrestees' repeated arrests as justification. This probation stipulation may be applicable for criminal recidivists, in particular domestic violence abusers, but it is hardly constitutional when applied to free speech. Denver's practice hasn’t been challenged yet, for want of sympathetic plaintiffs. Giving police protection orders, to prevent specific demonstrators from assembling near police lines, would seem to fall in a similar category of judicial misconduct.

FBI undercover rats on sovereign pals, says they planned to seize small county jails, except he was their lone soldier.

    DENVER, COLORADO- Very interesting testimony Friday at the trial of sovereigns Stephen Nalty and Steve Byfield. The prosecution's latest witness was FBI INFORMER Marshall Ringer. Not a sovereign citizen type turned by government agents, Ringer is a disgraced police officer hired by the FBI and inserted into the so-called "enterprise" to report its activities and propose courses of action conducive to arrests. Ringer calls himself a "self-employed security expert." His handler FBI Special Agent Ryan English calls him an "embedded confidencial human source". His targets gave him the title "Continental U.S. Marshall". They hoped he would recruit like-minded sovereigns to the cause of correcting what they saw as a corrupt judicial system. Ringer's FBI codename was "Earp". The accusations corruption hinged on the understanding that according to Article VI of the US Constitution, positions of public authority must take an oath secured by a bond. The "enterprise" had discovered that many Colorado judges and prosecutors and sheriffs and other elected officials didn't have oaths or bonds on file. If this expectation was indeed a misconception, and Article VI is inapplicable, you'd think the remedy might be to tell the would-be reformers, "no, that is not a requirement, here's why, etc." Strangely that was never done. Neither to their person, in a handout, or to reporters looking into this sad case. An undercover would present an excellent opportunity to huddle with the enterprise and say "hey guys, I was looking into this oath stuff and discovered that according to such and such law, or ruling or whatnot, oaths and bonds are no longer mandatory, end of story!" But "Earp" didn't. Nobody did. Nobody has yet to spell it out, even in this courtroom. When the defendants have tried to put Article VI into the trial record, they've been refused. So the issue is certainly a curious one. Instead of using an undercover to diffuse the oath-seekers by presenting the incontrovertible truth of their error, the FBI and the state prosecutors instead gathered evidence to ridicule their character. We're told they met in trailerhomes, they struggled to cobble enough money together to give their marshall a pair of handcuffs. They dreamed of putting together a network of De Jure judges to replace the corrupt ones currently alas De Facto. Tapes You might think the taped conversations of the sovereigns would be damning. The defendants certainly seem to be embarassed by them, but they're less incriminating than disarming. When "Earp" asked what was he to do with the officials he arrested, he was told, nothing, for now. Do not take any action on your own. Wait for instructions from the People's Grand Jury. Every time "Earp" goaded his colleagues about what he could do, they'd tell him to wait until matters could be addressed democratically and judicially. The most interesting information to come from the undercover testimony was about how the FBI wires up its informants. Colorado law requires that at least on person in a conversation consents to being recorded. As a result, every

Not The People v. Stephen Nalty and Steven Byfield. Right to an Unfair Trial.

DENVER, COLORADO-- The trial of accused "Paper Terrorists" Stephen Nalty and Steve Byfield began Monday in courtroom 2H of Denver district court. The two face 28 odd charges, from conspiracy, criminal enterprise, to racketeering, brought by the Colorado Attorney General and the FBI.   And they're defending themselves. In handcuffs.   Don't worry, they're holding their own. But already it's day one and authorities are piling on every disadvantage. On Monday the defendants were cheated of being able to prevent the state from stacking the jury (and the defendants don't even know it because they weren't in the courtroom to see it done). Watching the court clerks and lawyers prepare for the trial, you cannot but admire their civil spirit. In every hearing Nalty and Byfield have declined advisements and refused to recognize the authority of their adjudicators. The two sound like broken records about "oaths" and sovereign stuff, yet the judicial mechanism inches forward. It should of course, because the defendants have been jailed since MARCH. For six months Nalty and Byfield have been held on $350,000 bonds. Neither of them can afford even the interest on those sums. Of course their indictment and prosecution is a travesty and a misappropriation of public resources, but how else could the state stop their criminal enterprise except to admit wrongdoing itself? Nalty and Byfield are being railroaded and they're sure a jury will conclude the same. The People's Grand Jury For the last few years, among a team of eight "sovereign citizen" types, Nalty and Byfield have been serving judges and other public officials with legal papers and liens which achieved no response. Until Colorado's attorney general enlisted the FBI to squash the "criminal enterprise." The sovereigns face 28 charges of all the racketeering and conspiracy lingo, essentially for questioning why their local magistrates and officials had no oaths or bonds on file. When the sovereigns got no response, they formed a "People's Grand Jury" to indict the violators with their ad hoc public courts. Then they'd file commercial liens against those accused for defrauding the public in violation of Article 6 of the US constitution. When confronted from podiums, judges and lawmen dismiss the oath requirement out of hand, but it's interesting that none spell out exactly what law supersedes the US Constitution. News articles about the Paper Terrorists list the litany of criminal charges the defendants face, but have yet to mention the asserted law-breaking which is the Paper Terrorists' only complaint. It is hard to get a handle on what the "People's Grand Jury" really wants. In their dreams, they assert that the lack of filing of oaths should mean that all affected legal judgements should be overturned, and that all salaries drawn by government employees who did not file oaths or bonds should be returned to taxpayers, with interest. They calculate the total sum owed to the American people is in the multi trillions. So there's that. Some of the public officials targeted by the People's Grand Jury began to suffer strikes against their credit records when they didn't

Denver magistrate separates mother from breastfeeding infant. Jail refuses pump, as they do common decency.

DENVER, COLORADO- A heartbreaking scene unfolded yesterday when Denver Magistrate Kate Boland decided to impose a $10,000 bond on a domestic violence detainee, against the recommendations of the husband (victim), the public defender, and even the city prosecutor, who all wanted the 35-yr-old mother of five released on personal recognizance. Most critical, no consideration was paid to the family's month-old infant who is breastfeeding. Neither by Boland, nor the downtown detention center, known for its systemic disrespect for the rights and needs of its inmates. You might not care how poorly criminals or their children are treated, but the inmates of jails are suspects, not convicts. They are unconvicted detainees held on some officer's probable cause. They're suspected of a crime, but have a right to a fair trial (under the 6th Amendment) and a right not to be punished before conviction (under the 14th). Depending on who calls 911, they could be YOU. For those reasons (and the Golden Rule and the social contract), jails have to show a semblance of concern for the still innocent lives disrupted in their care. Denver's Van Cise-Simonet Detention Center has a famously outlandish record in that regard. Marvin Booker and Michael Marshall are two well known extremes to which Denver sheriffs deputies have disrespected inmates' lives. A rare survivor, Jamal Hunter, was awarded $3.25 million for beatings he received there. Unfortunately his settlement was contingent on burying the evidence of broader misconduct, thanks Jamal. Those cases have generated reviews and reforms, but abuses persist. Isn't it amazing that after repeated court-ordered overhauls, the public could still be told "the detention cenver has no protocols for breastfeeding mothers." Magistrate Boland made no allowance for the accused mother to maintain her feedings. After the morning hearing, friends learned the jail didn't care to accomodate the mother either. That afternoon Baby Thomas became ill and began vomiting, so the father brought the baby to the visitor's lobby hoping emergency visits could be arranged. The jail said no, though after some persuading, a sergeant agreed to convey a breastpump to the mother if one was supplied. A device was purchased and submitted, but the jail recinded their offer. This time a charge nurse named "Monica" explained she was under no obligation to comply, that she'd called her boss at Denver General who confirmed it. Without a court order, she said, the jail had no further responsibility. By now activists with Denver Court Support were agitating online about the plight of Baby Thomas. The jail was innundated with telephone calls. The sheriffs cleared the public lobby, cancelled visitations, and put the facility in lockdown in anticipation of a rally. Nevermind feeding Baby Thomas, release his mother immediately. Activists had raised the monies needed to hire a bondsman to post the bond. The jail was urged to expedite the mother's release once bond was posted. Shouldn't inmates be release when they've paid to have their freedom? This is where the Van Cise-Simonet's disrespect is arbitrary, punitive, and universal. Time to process inmates,

Denver judge dismisses case against masked marcher who knew his rights

DENVER, COLORADO - US veteran cryptologist Jordan McDuffie was detained after last year's Million Mask March and charged with two counts, Obstruction and Pedestrian-in-the-roadway, for stepping unto Lincoln Avenue west of the capitol steps when DPD says the Anon- masked protester they believe to have been Jordan ought not have. Before his May 24 jury trial could begin and after offering increasingly favorable plea deals, the city motioned to dismiss the charges. Jordan, age 26, is a recently discharged vet. He was arrested at the march held every year in Denver on Guy Fawkes Day, Nov5. On November 5, 2016, after meandering about Denver's pedestrian mall, keeping to the sidewalk as small demonstrations are wont to do, about ten masked protesters stood on northbound Lincoln for less than a minute until cops arrived and the protesters left the street. One masked standee, not Jordan, was chased by officers up and down Capitol Hill but no contact or arrest was made. That marked the end of the otherwise uneventful, nonviolent 2016 march. An hour later, after a calm rally of speeches and singing, when everyone had left, Jordan and two vet friends were walking to their car and were jumped by Metro SWAT. Jordan and friends were pushed to the ground by approx twelve officers. One friend had his phone knocked out of his hands as he tried to video Jordan's arrest. Jordan cried out that the officers were injuring his war wound for which he was discharged but the brutalization continued. Two blocks away another participant, African American Kris Randolph, 32, was similarly arrested, in front of his mom. Both he and Jordan were jailed overnight. Without being told he didn't have to, Kris gave a videotaped interview while in detention. The two were released the next day on $100 PR bonds. Kris and Jordan were given Colorado state case numbers (16M10457 & 16M10458) which were transferred sixty days later to municipal cases (17GS000146 & 17GS000195), no reason given, except their 90-day speedy trial clocks started only thereafter. Both were assigned to Division 3H with Judge Kerri Lombardi. Kris, a roofer, father of four, with a minor criminal record, qualified for a public defender. Kris kept a number of court dates but eventually FTA'd at an April disposition hearing. Hopefully Kris can get back on track in view of how Jordan was able to resolve his case. Jordan represented himself Pro Se through several hearings. Right from the start Jordan submitted multiple motions, one asserting his First Amendment right to assemble in the street etc, another demanding expanded discovery to include the DPD “After Action Report” (AAR) for Nov 5, 2016. An AAR erroneously disclosed in a previous case revealed that 27 undercover officers had been deployed at the 73-attendee 2015 Million Mask March. Judge Lombardi did not agree with Jordan’s assertion that he didn’t need a permit to be in the street, but granted his discovery request. She commanded the city lawyers to inquire about an AAR. At a March hearing, prosecutors produced an

Oath-sticklers take the US Constitution literally

DENVER, COLORADO- These guys have been complaining about corrupt local officials and trying every which way to bring them to justice, even the people's own. Now the state is throwing the book at the accusers. The eight are in jail, unable to post bond, and getting no attention from the press except derision. They're being labeled "Paper Terrorists" but no one's explaining what they were doing, certainly not trying to enrich themselves. What kind of "criminal enterprise" is not for profit? Here's the front page of their indictment:

As homeless defendants face camping charges, Denver courts lie to jurors.

DENVER, COLORADO- Trial began yesterday for three homeless activists charged with violating Denver's Unauthorized Camping Law. An ordinance enacted in 2012 partly as a coordinated response to Occupy Wall Street encampments across the country, partly to smooth the city's gentrification plans. Though six years old, the ordinance has escaped judicial scrutiny by DPD's careful avoidance of citing only homeless victims in no position to fight the charges in court. Deliberate civil disobedience attempts have been thwarted by the city bringing other charges in lieu of the "Urban Camping Ban" for which police threatened arrests. Thus Denver Homeless Out Loud's coup of at last dragging this sham into the Lindsey Flanigan Courthouse has generated plenty of interest. I counted four print reporters and three municipal court judges in the audience! From a jury pool of forty, city prosecutors were able to reject the many who stated outright they could not condemn the homeless defendants for the mere act of trying to survive. At one point the jury selection process was stymied for an hour trying to fill one remaining alternate seat because each successive candidate would not "check their social values at the door." One potential juror, a hairdresser, became alarmed that all the sympathetic candidates would be purged and so she refused to say how she felt about the homeless. She was removed and they were. As usual jurors were told it was not their place to decide against enforcing bad law. Only those who agreed were allowed to stay. And of course that's a lie. The only way bad laws are struck down, besides an act of congress, a please reflect how that near impossibility has spawned its own idiom, is when good jurors search their conscience and stand up for defendants. For those who might have wanted to get out of jury duty, it was an easy day. Show some humanity, provoke authentic laughter of agreement by declaring "Ain't no way I'm convicting people for camping." The jury pool heard that Denver's definition of camping is "to dwell in place with ANY FORM OF SHELTER" which could be a tent, sleeping bag, blanket, even newspaper. Several jury candidates stated they had relatives who were homeless. Another suggested it would be an injustice to press charges such as these. "So this isn't a case for you" the city lawyer asked. "This isn't a case for anyone" the prospective juror exclaimed, to a wave of enthusiam from the jury pool and audience. Another prospect said she didn't think this case should be prosecuted. The city attorney then asked, "so you couldn't be fair?" "I am being fair" she answered. All of these juror prospects were eliminated. What remained of the jury pool were citizens who swear to uphold whatever law, however vile. One juror that remained even said she gives the benefit of the doubt to police officers. Not removed. But there is hope because they couldn't remove everyone. Of the six that remain, one juror agreed to follow the law, even if it was a law

If it’s illegal for homeless to sit on the ground, take away their benches! The Tattered Cover sweeps its sidewalk.

DENVER, COLORADO- Homeless sweeps continue in Denver, this round the downtown development authority is sweeping away their furniture. In particular the Wazee-to-Wynkoop block of the 16th Street Mall, in front of the Tattered Cover Bookstore. Not only was the quiet block popular with Denver homeless, it is the site of Occupy Denver's friday night feed, the weekly shared community meal hosted at the doorstep of the Tattered Cover in protest of their support of the city's anti-homeless measures. With the benches gone, there remain no surfaces from which to serve food, nor of course, seating areas to accommodate the homeless community.

DIA issues protest permit under court order, but limits crowd size to, wait for it, FOUR! Then court stays injunction.

DENVER, COLORADO- Abiding by the injunction in McDonnell v Denver, DIA administrators granted us a free speech permit within 24-hours on Thursday, but they insisted that the terminal location desired could only accommodate FOUR PEOPLE. You heard right. Four. There's irony here too because there were FIVE people named on the permit application! Thus the permit was actually 20% denied, and in reality 92% denied given that we sought a permit for 50 people, a number easily lower than the DIA International Arrivals area can handle.   MEANWHILE, in the 10th Circuit Court, the city of Denver appealed the DIA injunction and asked for a stay. This is not usually granted in First Amendment cases, but on Thursday it was. The 10th Circuit stayed the injunction and wants to hear arguments on March 17. So at DIA for now we're back to the impermissive permit process that precludes accomodating public expression at the Denver airport. And the signing of President Trump's new improved Muslim Ban looms... THAT'S the more significant development in the case for free speech at DIA. But let's get back to our story, to how poorly DIA administrators complied during the small window when our court injunction was in force and DIA was enjoined to be accomodating to the public's right to expression. Getting the permit process started was not easy. There are instructions on the DIA website but no application. A call to DIA was routed to a person who insisted we read instructions online. We said we did. She replied that if we had, we'd know what to do. We reiterated that there was no application there, and that we needed an application. She took our names and vowed to have someone call us back. This was at 11:30am. After an hour we called back, explaining that time was of the essence, as was for them as well in responding to our request. We were given the same instruction, to consult the rules online. We explained that we'd READ the rules, STUDIED THEM in fact, and had them reviewed by a FEDERAL COURT. We exlained there was now a federal injunction to which DIA was bound and we required our permit request to be considered promptly, the first step of which, we presumed to be, the submission of an application! Our call was forwarded to a person who eventually emailed an application blank at approximately 4pm. We filed the application immediately and here's the correspondence that resulted: Mr. Dalton Please find attached a request for permit to protest at DIA at outside of international arrivals. We are requesting this in an expedited fashion  pursuant to judge Martinez's decision of a preliminary injunction re: Civil Action No 17-cv-0332-W JM-MJW. A new executive order is anticipated to be announced regarding the "Muslim ban" in the next day or two and we are requesting that the permit be processed within 24 hours to allow for a timely protest. We do not intend to obstruct airport operations. I will send you a copy

Colo. US District Court judge enjoins DIA to limit restriction of free speech (grants our preliminary injunction!)

DENVER, COLORADO- If your civil liberties have ever been violated by a cop, over your objections, only to have the officer say "See you in court", this victory is for YOU! On January 29 we were threatened with arrest for protesting the "Muslim Ban" at Denver International Airport. We argued that our conduct was protected speech and that they were violating our rights. They dismissed our complaints with, in essense: "That's for a court to decide." And today IT HAS! On Feb 15 we summoned the cops to federal court and this morning, Feb 22, US District Court Judge William Martinez granted our preliminary injunction, severely triming DIA's protest permit process. In a nutshell: no restrictions on signs, size of assemblies or their location within the main terminal (so long as the airport's function is not impeded). Permits are still required but with 24 hours advance notice, not seven days. Below is Judge Martinez' 46-page court order in full: Document 29 Filed 02/22/17 USDC Colorado IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge William J. Martínez Civil Action No. 17-cv-0332-WJM-MJW NAZLI MCDONNELL, and ERIC VERLO, Plaintiffs, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER,? DENVER POLICE COMMANDER ANTONIO LOPEZ, in his individual and official capacity, and? DENVER POLICE SERGEANT VIRGINIA QUIÑONES, in her individual and official capacity, Defendants. ________________________________________________________ ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION IN PART ________________________________________________________ Plaintiffs Nazli McDonnell (“McDonnell”) and Eric Verlo (“Verlo”) (together, “Plaintiffs”) sue the City and County of Denver (“Denver”), Denver Police Commander Antonio Lopez (“Lopez”) and Denver Police Sergeant Virginia Quiñones (“Quiñones”) (collectively, “Defendants”) for allegedly violating Plaintiffs’ First and Fourteenth Amendment rights when they prevented Plaintiffs from protesting without a permit in the Jeppesen Terminal at Denver International Airport (“Airport” or “Denver Airport”). (ECF No. 1.) Currently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction, which seeks to enjoin Denver from enforcing some of its policies regarding demonstrations and protests at the Airport. (ECF No. 2.) This motion has been fully briefed (see ECF Nos. 2, 20, 21, 23) and the Court held an evidentiary hearing on February 15, 2017 (“Preliminary Injunction Hearing”). For the reasons explained below, Plaintiffs’ Motion is granted to the following limited extent: • Defendants must issue an expressive activity permit on twenty-four hours’ notice in circumstances where an applicant, in good faith, seeks a permit for the purpose of communicating topical ideas reasonably relevant to the purposes and mission of the Airport, the immediate importance of which could not have been foreseen seven days or more in advance of the commencement of the activity for which the permit is sought, or when circumstances beyond the control of the permit applicant prevented timely filing of the application; ? • Defendants must make all reasonable efforts to accommodate the applicant’s preferred demonstration location, whether inside or outside of the Jeppesen Terminal, so long as the location is a place where the unticketed public is normally allowed to be; ? • Defendants may not enforce Denver Airport Regulation 50.09’s prohibition against “picketing” (as that term is

DPD commander reveals arrest threat is a regular “ploy” to disperse protest

DENVER, COLORADO- We heard on Friday that US judge William Martinez needed more time to craft an opinion on a temporary injunction of DIA's enforcement of their free speech permit. He commited to a decision early this week, and frankly we don't know what to expect. From challenges he posed to attorneys at Wednesday's hearing, the judge appears to think DIA needs some degree of "notice" about potential disruptions. He is unlikely to rule against the permit altogether because he opened the hearing already proclaiming that DIA is a "not a public forum" and thus has discretion about what expression to allow. DIA can limit subject matter, but not viewpoint, and can constrict assemblies. Judge Martinez's starting point was based on US Supreme Court precedent set at JFK and Dulles airports, ignoring that both of those facilities are decentralized and lack DIA's literal public square. Ironically, neither JFK or Dulles attempted to quash their Muslim Ban protests as did DIA. I'd like to mention some other details revealed at the preliminary injunction hearing. For starters, the person in charge of approving permits has a highy subjective attitude about viewpoint. To him, pro-military messages are not oints of view at all, they're just patriotic. They don't require permits. Also, his department hasn't declined to issue permits. They work with applicants to arrive at accommodations suitable to the airport. For example, the American Islamic Society was recently granted a permit, the airport requires they limit their participant numbers to FOUR. DPD Commander Tony Lopez explained why he needs advance notice of protest actions, to be able to schedule officers without having to pay short-notice overtime. Lopez revealed that his optimal staffing numbers are a one to one ratio with activists. Small wonder he was demoted to DIA from downtown District Six. Lopez also testified that he often threatens to make arrests "as a ploy" to make a crowd disperse. And "it usually works" he said. A next step is to mobilize his officers to appear to be targeting particular activists, to increase the intimidation, without an actual intention of making arrests, or justifying them. His testimony confirmed what I described to the court, of officers often threatening to arrest us, even when they had no legal basis, and telling us we needed a permit when none was required. From the attitude of the city attorneys and the DIA personnel, one became uneasily aware that administrators don't even blink at sacrificing civil liberties for the interests of security. If airport surveillance can't size you up as either a traveller or meetor-greetor, they can't predict your behavior and you've suddenly become a security risk. Airport customs and TSA lines are already areas inhospitable to personal freedoms. Apparently airport managers would like all their hallways and public centers to be as restricted. If cops had their way, public streets and sidewalks would be single-purpose conduits as well. We await a federal judge's ruling for now, with optimism in judgement superior to that of petty administrators, city lawyers and

Denver judge rules BEING HOMELESS IS IRRELEVANT to defendants charged with violating city’s urban camping ban

DENVER, COLORADO- A hearing was held today to review motions submitted before the criminal trial of three homeless activists arrested last November for violating Denver's Urban Camping Ban. Terese Howard, Jerry Burton, and Randy Russel featured in the infamous 2016 video that showed Denver police officers confiscating their sleeping bags and blankets on the snowy steps of city hall. Through attorney Jason Flores-Williams, fellow Denver Homeless Out Loud (DHOL) activists have filed a civil lawsuit to halt the city's homeless sweeps. In municipal court DHOL hopes to challenge the ordinance being used to harass, displace and imprison the downtown homeless. Already the city's case appears to be derailing based on developments at the motions hearing. Denver municipal court judge Kerri Lombardi approved all the city's motions and none for the defense. Lombardi approved the use of 404B evidence for the city, but simultaneously restricted Res Gestae evidence for the defense. In particular, she refused to qualify two experts on homelessness, precluding the accused from arguing a "necessity defense". Judge Lombardi stated that being homeless was irrelevant to whether they were violating the urban camping ban. When asked to recuse herself, the judge declined, so attorney Flores-Williams declared his intent to file an interlocutory appeal to bump the case to district court. Meanwhile speedy trial was waived and a new court date was set for April 5th. DHOL's 2/17 press release: Yesterday there was a dispositive motions hearing in the Camping Ban criminal cases where homeless and poor people are being charged with crimes for sleeping on the streets with blankets and shelter in Winter. The hearing was noteworthy for the bias and prejudice shown toward Defendants by the Court. 1) At the start of the hearing, prior to any argument, the Judge looked at Defense counsel and said: “The one thing I don’t want is any drama from you, Mr. Flores-Williams.” Defense counsel had never practiced in this court. 2) Without allowing any substantive legal argument, the Court ruled that it was permissible for theProsecution to file a 34-person witness list eight days after the court’s deadline and only two weeks prior to trial. 3) The Court then Excluded all of Defense’s expert witnesses without hearing or testimony, saying that “Homelessness has nothing to do with this case.” 4) The Court then ordered Defense counsel to limit all arguments so that no argument or line of questioning could be construed at trial as an attempt to persuade the jury that the Camping Ban ordinance is itself unjust. 5) At this juncture, defense counsel cited to Fed R. 37(c)and its CO equivalent concerning the prejudice resulting from late disclosure of witnesses. No court response. Defense counsel then quoted from sections from Chambers v. Mississippi, a landmark 1973 civil rights case concerned with due process in which the overall prejudice to defendants becomes so cumulative and egregious that defendants fair trial rights are eviscerated. No response. 6) The Court then took up a Motion from the prosecution that does not exist. A “Res Gestae/404(b) Motion” that wrongfully

I’m told it’s a good day when you get to say “motherfucker” in federal court

The Colorado Springs Gazette was not amused. Nor was the Denverite about my testimony yesterday in US district court, seeking an injunction against the Denver International Airport's free speech permit. The city attorney tried to discredit me by forcing me to recite for the federal judge the full unabridge text of the sign I held at DIA. It was a riff on anti-Nazi cleric Martin Niemöller's oft-paraphrased parable: "First they came for the Socialists, but I said nothing, etc", this time foreshortened as a visceral response to Trump's Muslim Ban: "-and we said NOT TODAY [strong expletive]!" We argued about whether my message was "welcoming". I assured her that it was very warmly received and could not be interpreted as anything but uniquivocal solidarity. So I read it forcefully, resisting the inclination to lean into the microphone on the last word. Afterward my attorneys assured me it's a good day in their line of work when you get to say MOTHERFUCKER in court! Judge William Martinez restricted hearing testimony to the single day (Wednesday) and promised to rule on the preliminary injunction by Friday, February 17.

Denver jury trial for offense of leaving your homeless little dog off the leash

DENVER, COLORADO- Adrian "Munk" Brown faces trial on Monday, charged his dog being at large on the Lindsey Flanigan Courthouse Plaza. This happened on June 21 of last year, when he was testifying at the trial of a fellow activist. Because Munk wouldn't let the dog catcher seize his dog, he is charged with interference. Because more than a dozen officers responded to the scene, things escalated from there and Munk was taken to jail. But that's the pretext. In truth-- ADRIAN BROWN WAS TARGETTED, STALKED, TAUNTED & ARRESTED. 1. BRIEF STORY OF INCIDENT 2. PREDICTED SCHEDULE 3. CALL TO ACTION 4. LEGAL DISCLAIMER 1. WHAT HAPPENED? Ridding the streets of substantive evils, three animal control officers, a dozen courthouse deputies, and half dozen Denver police ultimately arrest Munk for not having an ID card and animal at large. Of course they added obstructing animal control and interference with police. Join me on the plaza tomorrow at 7am. My unleashed dog will be with me. Who else has a well behaved and appropriate in public canine buddy they can bring? Am I the only one who finds it somewhat Orwellian that Munk was arrested when SGT A. A. Martinez shows up and asks Munk if he will give him his ID. Then Munk asks him who he is. To which Martinez responds: he will take that as a refusal (to identify) and cuffs and stuffs him. COPS ARE REQUIRED TO PRODUCE THEIR NAME AND BADGE ID NUMBER TO THE PUBLIC UPON DEMAND. Members of the public, whom cops serve, are not required to carry papers or ID card with them. So the Master shall be criminalized for refusing to produce a non-existent ID to a servant upon demand, by a servant who refused to identify himself as required? Did I miss something here? SGT A. A. MARTINEZ IS A KNOWN DOMESTIC TERRORIST WHO HAS BEEN OBSERVED ACCOSTING A PREGNANT WOMAN FOR SIMPLY SITTING DOWN ON THE GROUND TO REST. (Yes, it is a crime in Denver to sit on the ground). DEPUTY FOOS is a known terror leader who commands a group of violent terrorists known as the FOOShiban. FOOS and his lawless thugs have harassed, detained, obstructed, pestered, and kidnapped Munk many times in the past - in fact, when a bystander observing this event speaks out and tells Foos he knows who Munk is and to share - HE DOES! He pulls out his little book, flips a few pages, and points to a place on the page to which the animal control officer responds by writing information on the citation clearly implying that Foos knows Adrian Brown well enough to have his identifying information at his finger tips. 2. PREDICTED SCHEDULE OF MONDAY EVENTS: Based on past trials, I predict the schedule will approximately be: Day 1 0700 - CHALK-A-THON 0730 - JUROR RIGHTS OUTREACH 0830 - DOCKET BEGINS 1030 - JURY SELECTION 1300 - POLICE TESTIMONY DAY 2 0900 - BYSTANDER TESTIMONY 1500 - JURY DELIBERATION 1530 - JURY VERDICT - NOT GUILTY 3. CALL TO ACTION I am advocating not only for you to join us in perfectly legal

Occupy allstar Caryn Sodaro breaches bank doors, allows water protectors to ask Denver Wells Fargo to defund DAPL

DENVER, COLORADO- At the behest of the beseiged Standing Rock encampment currently blocking the Dakota Access Pipeline, Denver water protectors held an unannounced rally on the capitol steps Friday morning and marched prompty to the Wells Fargo building several blocks north. Led by the American Indian Movement, and joined by allies, the predominantly Native American assembly intended to deliver a message to the major banking entity underwriting the Energy Transfer pipeline project. The action Friday was prompted by President Trump's recent executive order to bypass legal restrictions holding up the drilling. Arriving at the bank, the hundred fifty marchers found all doors locked. After a few minutes of rallying outside, a door suddenly opened and everyone rushed inside the atrium. That everyone included drummers, dancers, leaders, and television crews. After a long rally and a round dance were held in the Wells Fargo atrium, another door leading to the bankteller counters miraculously opened and the group was able to rush in to the bank. Behind these miracles was veteran Occupy Denver activist Caryn Sodaro. The security guards and police were unable to reach the open door in time, so within a minute the lobby was filled with water protectors making loud their demands. Eventually all the banners were gathered inside and multiple television cameras and reporters covered it all. Occupy Denver has breached the Wells Fargo Building before, in 2011, for an allied action against the predatory bank. The original feat resulted in an arrest. In the bank lobby, the water protectors chanted and walked in circles as leaders asked to speak to bank representatives. None appeared, and eventually DPD took to a megaphone and gave the gathering three minutes to leave. That was the cue for AIM leader Glenn Morris to spend well over three minutes telling the bank and the police that the water protectors would be back. Caryn Sodaro urges water protectors to raise their voices so that bank officials can hear them from the upper floors. Caryn's feat on Friday was unheralded even as participants celebrated their victory. But that's par for the course for the unsung agitator. Maybe it's unwise to brag about it here. Nonesense. Activists deserve mythbuilding all the more when the adversarial media and moderate reformists refuse to credit radical actions. I've purposefully obfuscated the details of Caryn's breach so that they remain Occupy Denver trade secrets. But let's here give Caryn Sodaro her due. If the DPD can glean one lesson from their unsuccessful blockaid of marchers on Friday, it can be this: next time keep better eyes on Caryn!

Occupy v. Martinez (Plaza Protest Ban) 2016 US 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Decision AFFIRMING Prelim Injunction

Yesterday I published the federal judge's order to grant the 2015 preliminary injunction against the Lindsey Flanigan Courthouse. Since that time the city motioned to dismiss, there were show cause hearings, and depositions, and an appeal to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. On April 8, 2016 the appeals court AFFIRMED the preliminary injunction. As a result this legal action is on the road to becoming a permanent injunction, to be decided at trial this April. The prospects look promising, based on how the appelate judges schooled our First Amendment adversaries. I'm reprinting their full decision below. In particular you might enjoy Judge McHugh's citing of US Supreme Court Justice Owen Roberts, writing in 1939 for the majority, in a decision to uphold public first amendment rights in Hague v. [AFL-]CIO. Robert affirmed that streets were traditional free speech areas: "Wherever the title of streets and parks may rest, they have immemorially been held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions. Such use of the streets and public places has, from ancient times, been a part of the privileges, immunities, rights, and liberties of citizens. The privilege of a citizen of the United States to use the streets and parks for communication of views on national questions may be regulated in the interest of all; it is not absolute, but relative, and must be exercised in subordination to the general comfort and convenience, and in consonance with peace and good order; but it must not, in the guise of regulation, be abridged or denied." Here's the full 2016 opinion rejecting Denver's appeal of our federal injunction: Document: 01019599889 Date Filed: 04/08/2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT _________________________________ ERIC VERLO; JANET MATZEN; and FULLY INFORMED JURY ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs - Appellees, v. THE HONORABLE MICHAEL MARTINEZ, in his official capacity as Chief Judge of the Second Judicial District, Defendant - Appellant, v. THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO, a municipality; ROBERT C. WHITE, in his official capacity as Denver Chief of Police, Defendants - Appellees. _______________ FILED ?United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit April 8, 2016 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court No. 15-1319 _________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado ?(D.C. No. 1:15-CV-01775-WJM-MJW) _________________________________ Stephanie Lindquist Scoville, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General for the State of Colorado, Denver, Colorado (Cynthia H. Coffman, Attorney General; Frederick R. Yarger, Solicitor General; Matthew D. Grove, Assistant Solicitor General; Ralph L. Carr, Colorado Judicial Center, Denver, Colorado, with her on the briefs) for Defendant - Appellant. David A. Lane, Killmer, Lane & Newman, LLP, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiffs - Appellees. Wendy J. Shea, Assistant City Attorney; Geoffrey C. Klingsporn, Assistant City Attorney; Evan P. Lee, Assistant City Attorney; Cristina Peña Helm,

Occupy v. Martinez (Plaza Protest Ban) 2015 Order Granting Prelim Injunction

While we await a judge's response to the complaint and motion for a preliminary injunction against DIA's free speech permit, I was drawn to reminisce about an earlier federal injunction GRANTED against Denver's 2nd Judicial District. It was/is (!) also a preliminary injunction curbing police intimidation. This one prevents arrests of Jury Nullification pamphleteers at the Lindsey Flanigan Courthouse in Denver. More broadly, it halts the enforcement of the despotic "Chief Justice Order 1" which attempted to curb free speech in Tully Plaza, between the courthouse and the jail, site of innumerable protest rallies since the facility was erected in 2010. After a protracted legal battle, the case will finally come to trial in April 2017. This case also started with police overreach, then a complaint, a motion, and a hearing. In August 2015, US District Judge William Martinez issued the below court order granting the preliminary injunction. Document 28 Filed 08/25/15 USDC Colorado IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge William J. Martínez Civil Action No. 15-cv-1775-WJM-MJW ERIC VERLO,? JANET MATZEN, and? FULLY INFORMED JURY ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs, v. THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO, a municipality,?ROBERT C. WHITE, in his official capacity as chief of police for Denver, and CHIEF JUDGE MICHAEL MARTINEZ, in his official capacity as chief judge of the Second Judicial District, Defendants. ______________________________ ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ______________________________ Plaintiffs Eric Verlo, Janet Matzen, and the Fully Informed Jury Association (“FIJA”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this lawsuit to establish that they have a First Amendment right to distribute and discuss literature regarding jury nullification in the plaza outside of Denver’s Lindsey-Flanigan Courthouse (“Courthouse Plaza” or “Plaza”). (ECF Nos. 1, 13-1.) The Lindsey-Flanigan Courthouse is where most criminal proceedings take place for Colorado’s Second Judicial District (which is coterminous with the City and County of Denver). Plaintiffs have sued the City and County of Denver itself and its police chief, Robert C. White, in his official capacity (jointly, “Denver”). Plaintiffs have also sued the Hon. Michael A. Martinez 1 in his official capacity as Chief Judge of the Second Judicial District. Out of recognition that Plaintiffs’ lawsuit does not target Chief Judge Martinez himself but rather a policy promulgated by the Second Judicial District through Chief Judge Martinez, the Court will refer below to Chief Judge Martinez as “the Second Judicial District.” On the same day Plaintiffs filed their complaint, they also moved for a preliminary injunction to restrain Defendants from taking any action to stop them from distributing certain literature regarding, or advocating for, jury nullification on the Courthouse Plaza (“Motion”). (ECF No. 2.) The Second Judicial District, represented by the Colorado Attorney General’s office, filed a response defending its current policy of limiting expressive activities to certain areas away from the main walkways leading to the Courthouse doors. (ECF No. 24.) Denver, represented by the Denver City Attorney’s office, did not file a response, but instead filed a joint stipulation with Plaintiffs regarding the status of the Plaza. (ECF No. 23.) As

Thousands rally in Denver against wall and Muslim Ban

DENVER, COLORADO- Thousands streamed into Civic Center Park to spend Saturday afternoon listening to speeches against President Trump's MUSLIM BAN. Lots of families with kids so I kept my sign on the fringe pointed outward. I don't usually favor profanity but this slogan was spotted at New York's JFK airport last Satruday, then replicated across the country the same weekend. I spotted several at the Denver rally AND in Colorado Springs, because I think, NOT TODAY MOTHERFUCKER says it best. Racism, bigotry and wanton abuse of power is obscene.

Unresolved 2015 protest case reveals Denver police have been concealing evidence from all activist trials

DENVER, COLORADO- A seemingly ordinary protester-in-the-roadway case has exploded in the face of Denver city lawyers from the prosecutor’s office to the department of civil liabilities. The case against activist Eric Brandt, for chasing a police motorcade which had falsely arrested a fellow demonstrator, today revealed that in arrests made at political protests, Denver police have been withholding key reports from the evidence disclosed to those defendants. Denver police file what’s called an “After Action Report” for public protests that prompt a mobilized law enforcement response. But the department doesn’t release the report to arrestees who face charges stemming from those actions. Ostensibly the reports are kept secret to avoid public scrutiny of crowd control strategies, but the reports also document the attendance of officers who witness the purported crimes. Those --otherwise undocumented-- personnel write reports which are then not included in the discovery evidence. That is what defense lawyers call “Brady Material”, witnesses who are not consulted about what they saw, possibly exculpatory evidence which is being denied to the accused. What role those officers might play in the circumstances leading to the arrests is also kept a mystery. Last week just before Eric Brandt’s trial, a DPD After Action Report for the protest arrests of August 28, 2015 was accidentally brought to the court’s attention the morning of trial. DPD Commander Tony Lopez brought the AAR report with him as a crib sheet to help his officers corroborate their witness testimonies. The prosecuting attorney coaching the witnesses was offered the report as an aid and as a consequence she was obligated to reveal it to the defense. At first Judge Frederick Rogers gave the defense one hour to study the new document. An hour later, after everyone had pondered the implications, the jury pool was excused for good and Rogers conceded that more time was needed for further subpoenas. At a pretrial conference today Judge Rogers tried to limit the extent of additional evidence needed before the case could proceed. He rejected a subpoena which he deemed too broad, and limited requests for further AARs to those filed August 26 and 28th. While a prosecuting attorney described such reports as so rare she’s never encountered one before, another city attorney sheepishly admitted that a paralegal in his office had unearthed three AARs that may meet the criteria. So much for rare, that’s three in as many days. Another city attorney insisted that she needed to vet those beforehand, but a peeved Judge Rogers volunteered to assess their applicability himself. If they weren’t in his in-box by 4pm, he’d assume they were forwarded to the defense as ordered. In question in this particular case was a mention that the head of Denver’s Dept of Public Works had ordered the police action on August 28. This is at odds with all previous police testimony which denied communication with Public Works. It goes toward impeachment of those officers as well as establishing whether Denver police have been abusing the city’s “encumbrance” ordinance. The encumbrance

Top