Trial for Mid-Afternoon Singers Gets
Continued for Robert Facer and
Robert Norse: Go Again August 3rd
Two of Four Defendants get Justice Delayed by
City Attorney, for Singing In the Free Speech Zone,
Downtown Santa Cruz
by ~Bradley ( bradley [at] riseup.net )
On July 20th, Robert "Blindbear" Facer, a homeless street musician, and Robert Norse, a housed activist and long-time supporter of homeless civil rights, watched their trial get continued until August 3rd.
On January 6th, they were issued $445-each citations for an alleged violation of MC 9.36.020, the city's ordinance against "unreasonably disturbing noises," during a demonstration against war and occupation abroad and the local criminalization of poverty, within the traditional "free speech zone" outside of Bookshop Santa Cruz on the Pacific Avenue sidewalk.
Linda's Hearth insertion: quartet incident happened about three arms'-lengths from the Tom Scribner statue.
The police allegedly arrived at the January 6th demonstration to issue citations based on a "citizen's complaint" from Sean Reilly, a resident in the nearby St. George apartments. He complained because he was trying to sleep, at 2:30pm, on a Wednesday. Sean was in court on July 20th and presumably ready to testify. SCPD officer Lauren Schonfield, who issued the citations, also appeared in court.
Regarding the incident, Robert Norse wrote on Indybay.org, at http://www.indybay.org/new
"This whole prosecution (especially with the unusual involvement of the City Attorney) smacks of a desire to maintain an illegal 'move along' policy at the discretion of the police and nearby businesses and residents. [This is] not what the law and the Constitution allow."
The trial is being heard before Commissioner Kim Baskett in Department 10, located in the basement of the 5-story county building in Santa Cruz. Robert Facer is being represented by attorney Ed Frey, with legal support from Ray Glock-Grueneich. Robert Norse is defending himself.
Ed Frey presented a motion (half page) to the court. This apparently caught both the city attorney and judge by surprise. The city attorney requested, and was granted, 10 days to review the motion. The trial is scheduled to resume on Tuesday, August 3rd at 10pm. Commissioner Baskett explained that the court will hear the case until 11:45am, if needed, and then continue the next morning.
For more information, see:
More Sidewalk Singing Tickets Go to Trial
Santa Cruz City Municipal Code 9.36.020 Unreasonably Disturbing Noises:
"No person shall make, cause, suffer or permit to be made any noises or sounds (a) which are unreasonably disturbing or physically annoying to people of ordinary sensitiveness or which are so harsh or so prolonged or unnatural or unusual in their use, time or place as to cause physical discomfort to any person, and (b) which are not necessary in connection with an activity which is otherwise lawfully conducted. As used in this section, “lawfully conducted activities” shall include, but not be limited to, any and all activities conducted by the city for public health, safety or welfare purposes." http://bradleystuart.net/
by Robert Norse
Friday Jul 23rd, 2010 5:56 AM
Thanks to PeaceCamp2010 for showing up in solidarity and support.
Thanks to attorney Ed Frey and legal worker Ray Glock-Grueneich for preparing briefs that challenge the rickety facade of law used to mask police power, merchant privilege, the city attorney's increasingly bare-faced selective prosecution of activists, and city council's repressive priorities.
This prosecution is in the same family as that against Wes Modes for "parading without a permit" (See Bradley's companion story at http://www.indybay.org/new
It's also linked to the SCPD crackdown on street musicians generally using threats of citation and arrest under the Unreasonably Disturbing Noise [UDN] ordinance and the Disturbing the Peace penal code. This is part of the new crackdown on poor and counterculture folks downtown signaled by the "three unattended infractions and any thereafter can be misdemeanors" law that gears up the war against sleepers as well as other laws like the "show your ID before you get a room" requirement and the landlord rental inspection requirement currently being debated.
Becky Johnson's rushed trial for "sinister sidewalk singing" at mid-day where Judge Almquist twisted law and common sense to find her guilty can be found at http://beckyjohnsononewoma
The on-going War on Miguel de Leon and Anna Richardson will continue in August with the attempt to permanently enjoin them from sleeping downtown in a trial costing $50-100,000. (See http://www.indybay.org/new
The Street Performers Guild has been discussing legal and street responses to the misuse of MC 6.36.020, the UDN ordinance. Downtown cops under Sgt. Harms are using it as a pretext to shut down or move along (rather than quiet down) drummers, singers, and guitarists on Pacific Avenue. "Big Drum" Brent and Tamorack, two drummers, face $445 citations which go to court in the near future. Shannon Jae reports getting both a UDN cite and a "Move-Along-Every-Hour" in the so-called "Free Speech" zone in front of the Bookshop Santa Cruz--the same area where I and 3 others were cited for singing "Downtown, the Homeless View" back in January.
The continuance ordered by Commissioner Baskett in our case shows the court and the city on the defensive. Baskett has had no problems with the constitutionality of the UDN in prior prosecutions, taking police word as gospel. Attorney Ed Frey and Legal Worker Ray Glock-Grueneich's brief argues that state's Disturbing the Peace law takes precedence over the city's UDN ordinance. This would mean we have to be tried under the state law, which allows us a Public Defender, a jury trial, and a higher standard of proof (that our speech caused an imminent clear and present danger).
Police policy itself has been evasive and contradictory. Sgt. Harms, long the downtown daytme beat sergeant, declined to clarify what the volume standard was for the ordinance. He also claimed for many months that the law did not allow police officers to directly cite victims under UDN. Challenged repeatedly to show the specific law or policy with some written documentation, he reverted to the argument that it's just "police discretion".
The issue in our trial is whether private citizen heckler's (anonymous until taken to court) can shut down music or political speech of their choosing on Pacific Avenue by claiming it is Unreasonably Disturbing Noise. This, when the police, city attorney, and the law refuse to give any understandable standard for what would be a legal volume.
Of course, if the city attorney doesn't mind dumping more than $125,000 of city money into upholding the Mayor's right to exclude critics from city council for a silent brief "don't act like a Nazi salute", it's not surprising they're using similar repressive tactics on the street.