PROTESTERS ARRESTED IN SAN MIGUEL COUNTY
by Mike
Blessing, guest contributor. [February 26, 2006]
On February 15, Lee Kittell
and Dale Harapat -- both fathers who have been unreasonably denied access
to their children by the courts -- were arrested along with a third person
on a public sidewalk in front of District Attorney Richard Flores and Sheriff
Chris Major's office in Las Vegas, NM (San Miguel County). They were
simply holding up posters regarding wrong-doings of Richard Flores and
walking along the sidewalk. Two of the men have heart conditions
and
Lee was on crutches because of an injured ankle.
Upon arrival at the detention
center, both Lee and the third gentleman were checked by the prison nurse
and an ambulance was called. The stress of the incident caused chest
pains for both men. Dale was booked into prison, and prison officials
claimed they did so because "his friends said that he wanted to make a
statement." (They did not say that.) Dale was not released
until Friday afternoon.
We need to support these
men who are taking time away from their lives to make it known that this
system is corrupt and that it is hurting children and parents.
WHAT
YOU CAN DO: Make four phone calls to the following people
and voice your protest about this unlawful arrest and detainment. We may be protesting your situation the next time, and it is imperative
that we fight to hang on to the right to free assembly and free speech. It's about all we have at our disposal right now: to inform the public
about government official wrongdoing in our state.
Please forward this email
to your friends, family, and acquaintances and ask them to do the same.
San Miguel
County District Attorney Richard Flores -- 505-425-6746
San Miguel
County Sheriff Chris Majar -- 505-425-7589
Las Vegas,
New Mexico Mayor Henry Sanchez -- 505-425-7335 (let him know that you will
avoid Las Vegas, and tell all your friends to do so, since you could so
easily be unlawfully detained there)
Governor Richardson
-- 505-476-2200
While the [three arrested]
men were protesting on Thursday, someone came out of the DA/ Sheriff's
building with a camera and stood on the sidewalk blocking their way. Then the undersheriff, Benjamin Vigil, came out and told them that they
would have to leave. Dale and Lee politely responded that is was
a public sidewalk and that they had a right under the First Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution to peacefully demonstrate there. (They are
absolutely correct.)
None of the men badgered
anyone, except that the third man disagreed with the camera person who
blocked their way. There was no physical attack or threat. The men were fully clothed. There were no obscenities on their posters. They were not yelling or bothering passersby in any way.
They were charged with three
crimes:
NMSA 30-8-1
-- Public nuisance.
A public nuisance
consists of knowingly creating, performing or maintaining anything affecting
any number of citizens without lawful authority which is either:
A. injurious
to public health, safety, morals or welfare; or
B. interferes
with the exercise and enjoyment of public rights, including the right to
use public property.
Whoever commits
disorderly conduct is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.
[They
were charged with part A, but the camera guy was ACTUALLY committing part
B when he blocked their way.]
NMSA 30-20-1
-- Disorderly conduct consists of:
A. engaging
in
violent, abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, unreasonably loud or otherwise
disorderly conduct which tends to disturb the peace; or
B. maliciously
disturbing, threatening or, in an insolent manner, intentionally touching
any house occupied by any person.
Whoever commits
disorderly conduct is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.
[They were charged with part
A above.]
NMSA 30-20-3
-- Unlawful assembly
Unlawful assembly
consists of three or more persons assembling together with intent to do
any unlawful act with force or violence against the person or property
of another, and who shall make any overt act to carry out such unlawful
purpose.
Whoever commits
unlawful assembly is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.
All three men must show up
this month to respond to a summons. No date or time is given for
their appearance. They are ordered not to have any contact with each
other in the meantime (another clear violation of the First Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution).
At first, they were told
to show up Monday, which was President's Day. When Lee called to
clarify, they said any time over the next month would do. This whole
thing smacks of cronyism, false arrest, and fascism. Please forward
this email to your friends and acquaintances. We need a lot of calls
to force our government officials (remember, these guys work for YOU) to
uphold the U.S. Constitution and remove these bogus charges from Lee, Dale,
and the other guy's records.
[* Please forgive my ignorance
of the convoluted system of statutes that passes for a legal system in
New Mexico, but it sounds like the individual(s) who told Lee, Dale and
the as-yet-to-be-identified third guy to take a hike were in violation
of another
state statute:
30-20-13. Interference
with members of staff, public officials or the general public; trespass;
damage to property; misdemeanors; penalties.
A. No person
shall, at or in any building or other facility or property owned, operated
or controlled by the state or any of its political subdivisions, willfully
deny to staff, public officials or the general public:
(1) lawful
freedom of movement within the building or facility or the land on which
it is situated;
(2) lawful
use of the building or facility or the land on which it is situated; or
(3) the right
of lawful ingress and egress to the building or facility or the land on
which it is situated.
B. No person
shall, at or in any building or other facility or property owned, operated
or controlled by the state or any of its political subdivision [subdivisions],
willfully impede the staff or a public official or a member of the general
public through the use of restraint, abduction, coercion or intimidation
or when force and violence are present or threatened.
C. No person
shall willfully refuse or fail to leave the property of or any building
or other facility owned, operated or controlled by the state or any of
its political subdivisions when requested to do so by a lawful custodian
of the building, facility or property if the person is committing, threatens
to commit or incites others to commit any act which would disrupt, impair,
interfere with or obstruct the lawful mission, processes, procedures or
functions of the property, building or facility.
D. No person
shall willfully interfere with the educational process of any public or
private school by committing, threatening to commit or inciting others
to commit any act which would disrupt, impair, interfere with or obstruct
the lawful mission, processes, procedures or functions of a public or private
school.
E. Nothing
in this section shall be construed to prevent lawful assembly and peaceful
and orderly petition for the redress of grievances, including any labor
dispute.
F. Any person
who violates any of the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty
of a petty misdemeanor.
But then again, these rules
are for us, the private citizens, but not for them, our "public servants"
-- no doubt the instigator's boss will claim "sovereign immunity" or some
slipshod variant of such -- a "compelling state interest," "in the scope
of performing his duties," etc.
As I keep saying -- we don't
like what they do, we get to vote and write letters. They don't like
what we do, they send out SWAT with the snipers and armored vehicles.
|
