Forgot your password?
New user?
State prison plans: mental therapy or torture?
Green challenge to the Left
Ten Lessons from the Criminalization of Dissent
Document Actions
"Green Scare" case near resolution: defendants won’t finger others
EUGENE, Oregon, Wednesday, November 8— The four remaining non-cooperating defendants in the Oregon "Green Scare" case have agreed to drop their request for Federal (NSA) surveillance documents.
Recent negotiations between federal prosecutors and the defendants resulted in a global resolution non-cooperation plea agreement whereby the four defendants will agree to accept responsibility for their own roles in environmentally motivated actions, but will not agree to provide information or testify against anyone now or in the future.
Joyanna Zacher, Nathan Block, Daniel McGowan and Jonathan Paul were expected to appear before U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken on Friday the 10th to enter pleas related to alleged acts of property destruction and arson. The global resolution agreement allows prosecutors to put a close on the Oregon cases.
It is expected that Jeff Hogg, who has been held in contempt of court since May 16 for refusing to answer questions before a grand jury impaneled to investigate this case, will be released from jail soon after today's hearing.
Despite the agreement, Federal prosecutors have said they will ask the court to apply a "terrorism enhancement" at sentencing. Should Judge Aiken grant the government's request, the non-cooperating defendants could face up to 20 years in prison in addition to the terms of the plea agreement.
"We are relieved by the non-cooperation plea agreement but remain very concerned with government's efforts to brand these defendants as terrorists," said Lauren Regan, executive director of the Civil Liberties Defense Center in Eugene. "By branding them with the terrorist label, the government is trying to justify the millions of taxpayer dollars spent on investigating and prosecuting them or other animal rights and environmental activists regardless of whether their activities were constitutionally protected."
The FBI and federal prosecutors have conducted several roundups of suspects, issued subpoenas to environmentalists, levied unprecedented penalties for property crimes, and used threats of severe sanctions to coerce individuals to become federal informants. Civil rights and legal organizations, including the National Lawyers Guild, have questioned expansion of the definition of terrorism to include politically motivated acts of property destruction and vandalism that have resulted in no loss of life or injury.
"There is no question the government has a broader agenda to undermine the rights of environmental and animal rights activists," said Alejandro Queral, executive director of the Northwest Constitutional Rights Center. "There is movement at the federal and state levels to pass legislation that would silence lawful advocacy and target groups because of their political ideology."
Thanks to Jericho Boston