The J&P fails to argue its case in court

For weeks now, I have had a sense of impeding doom as the Pikes Peak Justice and Peace Commission has consistently failed to adequately argue the case of the Saint Patrick’s Day Seven police attack in the court of public opinion. The issue of how the city used its police force in a brutal manner to suppress the citizens right to express their opinions in public was not put forth in a strong manner, but rather increasingly was replaced with a love fest with the police chief, orchestrated by a religious pacifist contingent that only has seeked to underline its eternal commitment to turning the other cheek.

This meek and defeatist attitude about defending antiwar speech has now been extended into the court room, as the St Pat’s Day 7 seem headed towards losing their criminal case. They have allowed the ACLU lawyer to not argue their issues for them, all the while watching like meek sheep before the slaughter. So far, the desire to have their day in court has been taken away from them by their own lawyer!

Instead of arguing that the police acted in an unreasonable manner and with undue force, the attorney for the defense has said that the police were in an untenable situation, absolving them of any responsibility for what happened. What an astounding weak defense, as the St Pat’s Day 7 lawyer has absolved the city and its police force of all blame for the attack on his own defendants! Instead, he has confined the defense to only insisting that the ‘volunteers’ for the city contracted organizer of the event, John O’Donnell, had acted in an untrained and indisciplined manner, and that John O’Donnell himself had seemingly tried to cover up that fact.

But where is the obvious here? Did the police have to follow orders from the city contracted parade organizers without being obligated to use any of their own discretion? No they did not, but that is not being argued in the court by the defense lawyer. He just cedes the issue entirely, though it seems rather obvious that a little bit of police initiated discussion would have gone a long way before pulling out the heavy use of physical police force. Instead, he has weakly allowed the gloating cops involved to just act like it was their natural right to have attacked his defendants in they way that they did! And that the defendants probably brought about their own problems…

This case has also always centered on the role of John O’Donnell, and whether or not the City of Colorado Springs would be allowed to divorce itself entirely away from its relationship with him. Because neither the defense lawyer nor the Justice and Peace Center has made the slightest effort to expose this man’s incestuous relationship as city organizer of pro-military events for the city, they have allowed the man to posture as an innocent private person solely concerned with the ‘security’ of parade participants, and not as a suppressor of one point of political view to the favor of cheerleading the other political point of view, which is the pro-war point of view.

He has done this through consistent backing from the city government with tax monies taken from all the citizenry. This should all along have been the main defense argument, both in and out of court. Instead, in all cases, both the defense lawyer and many in the J&P have referred to him as being ‘good people.’ In fact, he is practically a paid employee of the City of Colorado Springs, who directs their police force even though a ‘private’ citizen and not a police official, and organizes major city events under the complete guidance of city government. And an official who suppresses free speech against war that he finds objectionable while allowing pro-military views to proliferate.

The J&P has not been arguing its case before the court in the trial, and has been weak at doing so in general. Today is going to be the last day of the trial, and hopefully the jurors can see through the obscurantist trial proceedings to understanding the real issues not being discussed there. And upon doing that, that they can find the defendants not guilty??? That is now a big ‘IF’.

Unfortunately, the defense lawyer has let a scenario be presented where it appears natural that when the police say jump, that the defendants should have jumped through the hoops IMMEDIATELY. And that by not doing so was in fact, only their way of blocking the parade route,which is what they, in fact, are charged with doing. In short, the St Pat’s Day 7 are seemingly being hung by their own lawyer.

PS- I had thought not to write any more here but am doing so now because of the importance of this trial event. I think it’s important that a true picture be presented of what is now transpiring in court here on this particular blog.

(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today)
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to The J&P fails to argue its case in court

  1. Avatar Marie Walden says:

    I’m still hoping for Walta’s Emmy-winning Columbo moment.

  2. Avatar tony logan says:

    Walta is not a bad lawyer at all. But it is flat out a horrible mistake to let the lawyer, any lawyer, decide a group’s political arguements in a trial. And in this particular trial it is doubly wrong to let the Walta play general, since it is only a trial over misdeamor charges where there are no absolutely grave legal consequences really to fear anyway.

    Walta looked good before noon yesterday simply because John O’Donnell and his associated clowns made themselves look so absolutely bad. After noon, the cops made him look like shit though, simply because Walta was not going to question their actions in any way, something that I think anybody with the slighest aniwar consciousness should find to be a totally lame and defective strategy. It certainly is not what the defendants themselves really wanted.

    Lay people want to totally defer to the lawyers, simply because many have never even been into a courtroom to observe a trial, have never thought about the the judicial system at all, and simply out of pure fear due to their lack of experience with cops and lawyers and other minor Gods serving the ruling class. Gods like the judges that talk up a good show about due process, but are a bunch of charlatans when you really come down to it.

    Oh well… Day 2 and we can always hope.

  3. Avatar The 13th says:

    Thanks for the update Tony.

    Perhaps Walta refrained from cross-questioning the cops to keep their testimonies to a minimum. I don’t think it’s realistic to try and prove inner motives per the police (at this point). They are a bitch and a half of relativities, and in the end only put conjecture’s diffuse against other more solid evidence, such as the photos including those at

    Have the 7 been to the stands yet? That’s when it’s time to tell the whole story…

  4. Avatar tony logan says:

    Victory! of sorts…. Two jurors out of 7 saw through the obfuscation of the issues and refused to meekly tag along and hung the jury. This despite the best effort of the judge to direct towards a guilty verdict, as he instructed the jury at the last moment that no obstruction of parade route was necessary to convict The Seven, only supposed intent to obstruct the route was necessary.

    As to your question, 13th, the police testified a lot of shit in mass, and only one of the Seven ever took the stand. That was Elizabeth Fineron. You had to be there to truly understand the bizarre idiocy of this proceeding. It was beyond possibly one’s wildest imagination?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *