[Street] [FAWG] Urgent Question Regarding Court Appearance

Theresa theresa at occupyboston.org
Wed Nov 23 17:30:04 EST 2011


I understand and respect that the GA is where this conversation and  
most decisions need to be made, but sometimes there needs to be a  
heads up on issue.  Consider this my heads up.  I cannot be at GA.  I  
live 80 miles away.  Therefore, these lists are the only what that I  
am able to communicate my concerns regarding issues that affect Occupy  
Boston.  I am not suggesting that we not trust our legal  
representatives, but that we ensure that they are accountable to the  
GA and that GA feels as though it is being represented.

Thanks for understanding,
Theresa



Quoting Katie <katie.gradowski at gmail.com>:

> Not only do the lawyers represent OB, but we also have a legal team  
> AT OB which is doing amazing work on this case.
>
> As Rita mentioned, there is also a forum for accountability - the  
> general assembly.   While concerns about allocation of power are  
> certainly valid, I'd like to stress that the GA is both the client  
> being represented and the most reasonable forum for voicing these  
> concerns.
>
> Best
>
> Katie
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 23, 2011, at 1:45 PM, rita sebastian <rita at brandeis.edu> wrote:
>
>> The attorneys work for the GA and are accountable to it, so  
>> everyone participates in the high-level direction of the case. The  
>> selection about who submits affadavits is part of the legal  
>> strategy - which is where the attorneys have expertise. From a  
>> legal standpoint, the only way to prevent eviction is to argue that  
>> the encampment is protected under the First Amendment.  This is a  
>> difficult constitutional argument. Everyone agrees that free speech  
>> is protected - that we can march, carry signs, etc.  However, the  
>> City does not agree that the tents and encampment are necessary to  
>> exercising speech. Our attorneys are maintaining that the tents can  
>> be construed as "symbolic speech", which is protected under some  
>> circumstances. They have a difficult challenge to prove this - the  
>> Supreme Court has never upheld such an extension of this argument.   
>> The attorneys select what goes in the affadavits according to how  
>> it bolsters the constitutional argument they are making, not  
>> according to how well the people represent the Occupation Movement.  
>> Most of the affadavits are coming from people outside the movement,  
>> like teachers who brought students to the camp, because the Supreme  
>> Court case history on symbolic speech places a high importance on  
>> how the speech is perceived.
>>
>> The particular court action in progress is a pre-emptive  action -  
>> it is designed to prevent what happened to Occupy Wall Street and  
>> other places. We would not have gotten a hearing if the attorneys  
>> did not outline the constitutional challenge.  Otherwise, the only  
>> trials would be after -the-fact for the people arrested during the  
>> eviction.  If that occurs, we may have more legal options - you  
>> might use the criminal trials as a way to express the message to  
>> the public or even try to turn it into theater as happened with the  
>> Chicago 7 trial.  However, a pre-emptive court action like this  
>> doesn't have as many options: everything has to deal with the  
>> constitutional law issue.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Rita
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Theresa <theresa at occupyboston.org> wrote:
>> I am sending this to all work groups I am part of because I have a  
>> serious concern that Occupy Boston is giving up too much control  
>> over our voice to these attorneys  in this legal process we are  
>> involved in.
>>
>>
>> IF we are allowed 5 testimonies, who decides which 5 affadavits are  
>> submitted in court???
>>
>> The reason I ask is that I fear that our Occupation is going to be  
>> misrepresented in court because there are better "names" that are  
>> willing to write a letter than those who have actually in any way  
>> participated in Occupy Boston.  Is anyone looking at this or are we  
>> just trusting that legal wouldn't pick big names to represent  
>> Occupy Boston?  I suggest there be some kind of consensus on which  
>> affidavits are used in court. It is very tempting for a lawyer to  
>> go with "big names" or "established" people because it lends  
>> credibility or looks good on their end...but we need to look out  
>> for our best interest at Occupy Boston, not what looks good for the  
>> lawyer in court.
>>
>> We are the 99% and we have enough intellect and ability to  
>> represent ourselves through voices of those participating.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ob-finance mailing list
>>
>> Post: Ob-finance at lists.mayfirst.org
>> List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/ob-finance
>>
>> To Unsubscribe
>>       Send email to:  Ob-finance-unsubscribe at lists.mayfirst.org
>>       Or visit: %(user_optionsurl)s
>>
>> You are subscribed as: %(user_address)s
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Rita Monestersky- Sebastian
>> Brandeis, MA SID' 2009
>>
>> "If you cannot change yourself, how can you change the world?"
>> Gandhi
>> _______________________________________________
>> Street mailing list
>>
>> Post: Street at lists.occupyboston.org
>> List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/street
>>
>> To Unsubscribe
>>        Send email to:  Street-unsubscribe at lists.occupyboston.org
>>        Or visit:  
>> https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/street/katie.gradowski%40gmail.com
>>
>> You are subscribed as: katie.gradowski at gmail.com
>





More information about the Street mailing list