Bill
07-22-2007, 05:07 PM
There's a lawsuit going down against a Pennsylvania town that arrested an old man for refusing to put down his sign protesting against the Iraq war, while he was standing in one of the infamous "free speech zones".
This lawsuit has attracted attention because the defense for the town tried to supress both the content of the sign, and the mere mention of Bush the Lessor's name in the trial.
Because, they said, Bush's unpopularity may sway the jury against them, and the content of the sign may sway the jury agianst them.
But, look slike the judge struck down the motions by the defense, and the civil lawsuit will be allowed to mention Bush and the Iraq war.
So, it looks like the fascist pricks who arrested the old guy might end up paying some big bucks for their belief that they had the right to suppress free speech and arrest an old guy when he had done nothing wrong, except exercise his american rights.
I've heard there are more cases like this coming up thru the courts - could be the pricks are going to lose a freekin- boatload of money in the next few years, and finally pay the piper for their little experiment in "crowd control".
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1184869654447
"Pratter found that the message on Lischner's sign and Bush's identity, as well as the circumstances surrounding his visit -- including the war in Iraq and Bush's bid for re-election -- are "relevant to the determination of probable cause and to the adequacy of Upper Darby's training and policies."
All relevant evidence is "generally admissible," Pratter said, and "the president's identity and Dr. Lischner's opposition to the war in Iraq -- presumably as evidenced by the text on his sign -- are relevant because they are part of the circumstances weighing on the probable cause analysis conducted by Officer [Michael] Kehrle."
According to court papers, Bush came to Upper Darby on Sept. 15, 2003, for an event with local supporters at the Drexelbrook Catering Facility, located within a privately owned residential community.
It was a private, by-invitation-only event, but Drexelbrook had designated an outdoor space on its property for members of the public to observe the arrival of the president's motorcade.
However, Drexelbrook Associates instructed the Upper Darby Police Department that neither protesting nor the displaying of signs would be permitted on its property.
Lischner, then 78 years old, was one of the 50 members of the public gathered along the driveway and had placed a torso-sized sign on the front of his chest with a message that stated: "Withdraw our troops from Iraq. Give the $87 billion to the Iraqi governing council and U.N. for immediate relief and repair of the destruction we caused."
The suit alleges that Kehrle told Lischner that no signs or demonstrators were permitted, and that he would have to leave the premises if he did not remove the sign. When Lischner repeatedly refused to remove the sign or leave, Kehrle arrested him on charges of defiant trespass.
Lischner was later found not guilty of disorderly conduct -- the crime with which he was eventually charged -- and filed a civil rights suit alleging that the arrest was without probable cause.
In a previous ruling, Pratter refused to dismiss the suit, finding that the conditions imposed by Drexelbrook were illegal and that a jury must decide "whether Upper Darby had a policy, practice or custom of enforcing the landowner's unlawful condition."
Also to be decided by the jury, Pratter said, is "whether Upper Darby failed to adequately train its police officers and such failure to train caused Dr. Lischner's constitutional injury."
Now Pratter has ruled that, at trial, Bush's identity has legal significance because it bears directly on the legality of Upper Darby's policies.
"The facts that the political candidate was not only a candidate for arguably the most important office in our government, but also the current president participating in a campaign for re-election, were important to the court's determination that the condition imposed by Drexelbrook was illegal and, thus, relevant to the probable cause determination.""
This lawsuit has attracted attention because the defense for the town tried to supress both the content of the sign, and the mere mention of Bush the Lessor's name in the trial.
Because, they said, Bush's unpopularity may sway the jury against them, and the content of the sign may sway the jury agianst them.
But, look slike the judge struck down the motions by the defense, and the civil lawsuit will be allowed to mention Bush and the Iraq war.
So, it looks like the fascist pricks who arrested the old guy might end up paying some big bucks for their belief that they had the right to suppress free speech and arrest an old guy when he had done nothing wrong, except exercise his american rights.
I've heard there are more cases like this coming up thru the courts - could be the pricks are going to lose a freekin- boatload of money in the next few years, and finally pay the piper for their little experiment in "crowd control".
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1184869654447
"Pratter found that the message on Lischner's sign and Bush's identity, as well as the circumstances surrounding his visit -- including the war in Iraq and Bush's bid for re-election -- are "relevant to the determination of probable cause and to the adequacy of Upper Darby's training and policies."
All relevant evidence is "generally admissible," Pratter said, and "the president's identity and Dr. Lischner's opposition to the war in Iraq -- presumably as evidenced by the text on his sign -- are relevant because they are part of the circumstances weighing on the probable cause analysis conducted by Officer [Michael] Kehrle."
According to court papers, Bush came to Upper Darby on Sept. 15, 2003, for an event with local supporters at the Drexelbrook Catering Facility, located within a privately owned residential community.
It was a private, by-invitation-only event, but Drexelbrook had designated an outdoor space on its property for members of the public to observe the arrival of the president's motorcade.
However, Drexelbrook Associates instructed the Upper Darby Police Department that neither protesting nor the displaying of signs would be permitted on its property.
Lischner, then 78 years old, was one of the 50 members of the public gathered along the driveway and had placed a torso-sized sign on the front of his chest with a message that stated: "Withdraw our troops from Iraq. Give the $87 billion to the Iraqi governing council and U.N. for immediate relief and repair of the destruction we caused."
The suit alleges that Kehrle told Lischner that no signs or demonstrators were permitted, and that he would have to leave the premises if he did not remove the sign. When Lischner repeatedly refused to remove the sign or leave, Kehrle arrested him on charges of defiant trespass.
Lischner was later found not guilty of disorderly conduct -- the crime with which he was eventually charged -- and filed a civil rights suit alleging that the arrest was without probable cause.
In a previous ruling, Pratter refused to dismiss the suit, finding that the conditions imposed by Drexelbrook were illegal and that a jury must decide "whether Upper Darby had a policy, practice or custom of enforcing the landowner's unlawful condition."
Also to be decided by the jury, Pratter said, is "whether Upper Darby failed to adequately train its police officers and such failure to train caused Dr. Lischner's constitutional injury."
Now Pratter has ruled that, at trial, Bush's identity has legal significance because it bears directly on the legality of Upper Darby's policies.
"The facts that the political candidate was not only a candidate for arguably the most important office in our government, but also the current president participating in a campaign for re-election, were important to the court's determination that the condition imposed by Drexelbrook was illegal and, thus, relevant to the probable cause determination.""