portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article portland metro

forest defense

News for any federal lawyers&Northwest Forest Pass activists still out there...

Going to a bogus court case today related to a time my car was found behind a Forest Service pseudo-blockaded road, the judge rejects arguments and evidence. However, he decided that he wants a legal brief from the prosecution justifying their right to prosecute people for parking "crimes" committed on Federal property in which the defendant's identity is assumed from vehicle registrations.
I appeared in a Federal Courtroom in Portland just a few minutes ago to defend myself with regard to a $100 parking "crime" committed on National Forest land. I avoided testifying because I didn't want to be cross-examined, but proceeded to question the citing officer, and enter photographic evidence from the scene, and make an argument that the forest service had a duty to post signs relating to unexpected parking prohibitions. He found my arguments lacking, but but because the context of the trial was fairly informal, proceeded to state what "testimony" I had given in my argument that he was disregarding.

He decided to disregard any implication that I was the person who parked my car on the blackaded road, and then asked the prosecution to justify convicting a person of a misdemeanor parking crime for a case in which no direct evidence placed the defandant at the scene of the crime. The prosecution made an ad-hoc argument that there was a precedent set for cases like this, that most of the cases the federal court handles are parking tickets and that the "justice system" would be crippled if were not allowed to infer the identity of the criminal from the registration of the vehicle. In particular, he cited the recently-formalized and expanded National Forest Pass Fee Demo Project, and suggested that it would be disabled if he could no longer prosecute people for whom the Forest Rangers did not wait to return to their car. He also argued that parking cases fall under the category of Mallus Prohibitum, and not Mallus Esus (I don't remember exactly what that second word was, but it meant doing things that the community considers "truly bad"), and shouldn't be subject to trial by the burden of the evidence, or that car registration information should be considered overwhelming evidence.

The judge didn't seem to care about that and said he was interested in looking at the matter further, setting a one week deadline for the US Attorney General's office to submit a legal brief, and then a week beyond that for me to respond. Here is my open call to the community at large, that if they want to be a part of the precedent-setting decision, they should advise and assist me in formulating a response to the prosecution's legal brief. I am not really concerned about the suggested $100 fine if I am found guilty, even though I don't have the money to pay it, but rather I'm more interested in the precedents that this decision could set for prosecutability of Federally regulated crimes in this region. If people want to weigh in on the matter, I'll be happy to let them, and if I benefit in the process, then so be it. I'll be sending this message out as far as I can think to do so, and if you know anyone who might be interested in the case, please pass it along.

Live brightly.

phone: phone: (503) 241-4879 (CFA)
address: address: 1540 SE Clinton St. Portland OR 97202

some ideas 23.Mar.2003 06:15


immediately file motion for dismissal, lack of evidence.
immediately file motion for dismissal, failure to present a prima facia case.
read the federal "rules of evidence" to see why most of this case is inadmissable.
Learn and memorize Federal Rules of Evidence

What is the statuatory authority for the ticket?
.Attack the indictment, point out any deficiencies of charging document

read the so-called precedents the persecuter presented.
you will probably find they do not exist! that could be considered perjury...
find some relevant case law to support your position.
ask the law librarian to help you find things in the law library.

you are entitled to a jury trial, demand it!
when a judge denies a defendant legal counsel, then he must hold a Baretta hearing.
challange the jurisdiction of the federal court to hear this case.
Elements of the offense must be proven for conviction:
was it willful? was it unlawfull? was it intentional?
If all elements are not provable, beyond a resonable doubt,
move to dismiss for failure to state an offense.
if you should loose, make an immediate appeal, citing all legal mistakes in your trial...

Get these for your legal case:
1.Docket sheet.
2.Complete transcript.
3.Charging document.
4.Every scrap of paperwork and information.

Demand discovery from persecutor, probably hiding something relevant.
were you denied compulsary process for witnesses for defense? (article 6).
Does the judge deny you-defendant, a constitutional right?

Bring a federal civil lawsuit, Title 42, s1983, for violation of civil rights.
Ask for a resonable sum of money.