portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article oregon & cascadia

prisons & prisoners

Jeffrey Free Luers Case is in Appeal Stage-Write a letter today!

Jeff was sentenced to 22.5 years for the burning of three SUVs in the summer of 2000 in Eugene, Oregon. Say what you want about the action, 23 years is an absurd sentence and is more about silencing any dissent than justice. A sample letter is included below.
Jeffrey Free Luers Case is in Appeal Stage-Write a letter today!
Jeffrey Free Luers Case is in Appeal Stage-Write a letter today!
Sample Letter to the Attorney General of Oregon on Free's Behalf
---please write a letter or email  hardy.myers@doj.state.or.us

Mr. Hardy Myers,
Attorney General-State of Oregon
400 Justice Building
Salem, Oregon 97310


Re: Jeffrey Luers, Appellate Case #A115208

Dear Sir,

I am writing in regards to the Circuit Court appeal of Jeffrey Michael Luers. Jeffrey is appealing his conviction and sentence relating to the 2000 arson at Romania Chevrolet and attempted arson at Tyree Oil Company, both in Eugene, Oregon.

Notably, this includes conviction on three separate counts of Arson 1, with enhancement to Measure 11, for a single fire at Romania Chevrolet, a fire in which no one was injured. At trial, the State's witness testified that they were in no danger of injury. By his own admission, Jeffrey stated that great care was taken to prevent injury to anyone. The fire was intended to damage property, and property was all that was damaged - less than $40,000 worth. While not dismissing the serious nature of the crime, enhancement to Measure 11 is unwarranted, as there were no injuries and damage was relatively minor.

I also question the conviction on three separate counts of Arson 1 for a single fire. Jeffrey was sentenced to 22 years, eight months, a sentence far greater than that faced by many offenders convicted of violent acts against individuals. For example, Manslaughter 1 carries a 10 year sentence; Attempted Murder, only 7and a half years; Rape 1, 8 years four months. Clearly, Jeffrey's sentence is vastly disproportionate to the crime of burning three vehicles. In fact, his co-defendant received only 66 months. It is my belief that Jeffrey's sentence is due more to his political beliefs than to the severity of the crime.

Therefore, Mr. Myers, it is my sincere hope that you will take these points into account with regards to Jeffrey's appeal, and that you will consider allowing the State of Oregon to concede to a lesser sentence in the interest of justice.

Sincerely,

your name & address

homepage: homepage: http://www.freefreenow.org

Wrong 24.Apr.2003 08:18

me

It's not about silencing dissent ... it's about locking up a terrorist. Thanks for the contact information. I shall certainly be contacting Hardy Myers to voice my strong support for this conviction and opposition to the appeal. This guy belongs behind bars and I hope he stays there for a good long time.

Who are the terrorists 24.Apr.2003 09:02

CatWoman

When the forests are gone, when the water we depend on is gone, when every last resource that once sustained us has been long since turned to dried, dead, dollars, then we will all understand who the real terrorists were. By then, it will be too late.

The sacrificing of a few SUVs was a small price to pay for the public enlightenment that has been gained since Free went to prison. I count myself among those who hadn't given enough thought to the connection between the everyday choice we make to use or not to use oil, and the environmental destruction that is rapidly overtaking us all. I credit Free and others with making me think more about that and make changes accordingly.

Vandalism and other crimes against property is not terrorism. Terrorism is killing people for their oil. Terrorism is destroying the world we live in for short term economic gains. Terrorism is striking fear of life and limb into people for political reasons. In short, the US is steeped in terrorism. But Free is not among the terrorists.

I plan to write a letter on his behalf. I urge anyone who wants to breathe clean air, drink clean water, or experience what a real forest is, to do the same.

Done 24.Apr.2003 09:23

Duncan

Letter written. For all you busy lefties it took me less then twenty minutes. Remember to write the letter yourself so that it isn't a form letter, but hit all the salient points.

Thanks for the tip.

CatWoman 24.Apr.2003 09:27

me

In a like manner, the sacrificing of a few terrorists is a small price to pay for the enlightenment gained by other eco-terrorists that this behavior is unnacceptable and will be punished.

Allow me to come burn your house to the ground and then see if you still feel "Vandalism and other crimes against property is not terrorism".

Nitwit

To Me 24.Apr.2003 10:06

CatWoman

First, you cannot be "me," because I am me. I am the one and only me, so far as I can see.

Second, dork, do you live in an SUV?

Third, is that a threat? Because if it is, you may find you will get more than you bargained for.

Fourth, have you noticed there are no forests left? Have you? Go look for one. Twenty years ago, it would have been easy to find old growth forests all around this area. Not so easy now.

Timber companies are "harvesting" public forests for private gain. They're taking something that belongs -- for lack of a better word -- to us all, and converting it to mud and waste and landslides. They make a killing, then they leave. The logging jobs dry up, the mills shut down, and the forests are gone forever. That, my friend, is terrorism.

Did you shed a tear for the SUVs? Did you fear for your life when you heard they had burned? Because I didn't. I was not remotely terrorized by this incident.

Terrorism, my friend, requires terror. Despite what corporate interests would have you believe, actual TERROR is the main ingredient in TERRORism. Buring a few SUVs is unlikely to inspire terror in anyone. Burning someone's house down may be another matter. In any case, Free is no terrorist.

Probably not 24.Apr.2003 10:41

me

"Third, is that a threat? Because if it is, you may find you will get more than you bargained for."

In a like vein ... is this a rhetorical question?

For heaven's sake ... of course it's not a threat. I was attempting to suggest a parallel based upon your notion that it's okay to destroy anything in order to further a politcal agenda, as long as no one is physically injured.

Apparently I used too many polysyllabic words ... sorry 'bout that.

Suppose, instead, I suggest that your stance implies that it would have been okay for the US to bomb Iraq to complete rubble ... so long as it was done without any human injuries. Does that make any sense??

he should be proud to serve his full term. 24.Apr.2003 11:24

bongo boy

if he were a true freedom fighter, he wouldn't be whining for early release.

I wrote them, and told them, that if this unrepentent person is released, and commits another terrorist act, that the people who let him go, would be held accountable.

I think that took care of the early release issue.

have a nice day..

Lock Up More People 24.Apr.2003 11:53

snood

My title says it all. I hate SUVs, but this guy should serve the full sentence. Maybe it will make a few others think.

Sqaubble? 24.Apr.2003 12:36

Jack Francis

SUVs are not as important as the environment. That is all there is to this matter. Granted, blowing up three of them is but an act of frustration, however, no one should be put in jail for 22 years for mere destruction of property that would have gone on to add to the horrors of our ecological reality. Also, we should consider that there are other crimes much worse (rape, for instance) than that commited by Free, crimes which recieve less sever sentences. Please stop being smug about this person's life--he did nothing to endanger anyone--and the sooner he is free, the sooner he will be back helping on forest issues and building our community. What is worth more: private property or life itself?

Dear CatWoman and Me(ow) 24.Apr.2003 13:10

10th grada'

Good discussion, Cat & Meow.

In spite of the antagonism, the debate is in there.

"I was attempting to suggest a parallel based upon your notion that it's okay to destroy anything in order to further a politcal agenda, as long as no one is physically injured."

"I suggest that your stance implies that it would have been okay for the US to bomb Iraq to complete rubble ... so long as it was done without any human injuries."

I didn't get that at all for CatWoman's post. Maybe you encountered a few too many polysyllabic words yourself! ;)

What I got was that a few corporate owned SUV's being torched at a time when nobody would get hurt is not terrorism. When my dad's car was broken into, that wasn't terrorism. When your neighbor had a burglar, that wasn't terrorism.

Throwing a brick through someone's bedroom window with a threatening note is terrorism. Ashcroft telling us we'd better watch what we say (or risk being locked up)--that's terrorism.

Bombing homes in Iraq (if it's an accident) isn't terrorism. Attacking Iraq to send a message to the world that it had better do what America says--that's terrorism.

Get the distinction?

The Point 24.Apr.2003 13:26

Anti-Fa

The point is not that he is contesting the conviction - he is contesting the sentence. He has been convicted for arson and he serving a sentence much longer than the average for arson. Further, he was convicted for three counts for one fire. The sentencing was obviously politically motivated - he was given a harsher sentence because of the political nature of the act. Your support of his politics are neither here nor there - the point is that we (supposedly) do not convict people for solely political reasons in this country, and thus he should be given a sentence commensurate with his actions, and more reflective of an average sentence for the same crimes - which if I remember correctly is somewhere near 42 months.

Fuzzy Math 24.Apr.2003 13:31

abc123

Uh, the comparison of "crime times" is a little fuzzy. You compare crimes such as manslaughter and rape that carry "less time". Not true, if you add them up. Your friend was charged with THREE counts of arson. So when you compare the sentences for rape and manslaughter you must multiply them by THREE. So, using your rape scenario he is serving less time as an arsonist. Same with the manslaughter charge and attempted murder.

This web site is beginning to distort the truth as bad as Fox News.

Better sample letter 24.Apr.2003 13:54

bArk

Dear Sir,

People like me don't feel as if Mr. Free should be held accountable for his actions. You see Sir, it's people like me that don't know better ways of making changes to things we don't agree with other than acting out like spoiled snot nosed high school students. Mr. Free doesn't like SUV's so he burns them. Admittedly, one poster on Indymedia under the name of Cat Woman says that she was enlightened by Mr. Free's criminal act and therefore, it was the right thing to do.

So please Mr. Judge, we are waiting here at our dignity...oops, I mean "peace camp" for the safe return of our arsonist....oops, I mean educator of truth. Please let him out early because, lets face it......we all should respect eachother and not everybody has the same ability to control their inner most criminal urges.....oops I mean we should honor the diversity of ways to communicate our opinions about the things we dont like.

Sincerely,

Your name here
Peace camp
Terry Shrunk Plaza (lounge chair #2)

Time for "crime" 24.Apr.2003 14:13

Observer

Interestingly, at the time that Free was sentenced, another man was having his day in court as well. He was a drunk driver who killed someone. Guess who got more time? Hint: It wasn't the drunk killer. Not only that, but Free got several times the sentence the killer got. Still think this isn't political?

Freeing Free 25.Apr.2003 09:13

Lasso

I'll write a letter for Free. I admire what he did. How is blowing up Iraqis for oil "heroic," while burning a few SUVs to save the planet "criminal"? Just shows who writes the laws and why. No profit in burned SUVs, plenty of profit in dead Iraqis. Capitalism stinks.

Great points 25.Apr.2003 12:11

Tree Topper

I read a lot of great points from both sides of the issue. Of course I also read just a bunch of nothing from both sides.

The line of work I do to support my family is what most of you all hate. I work under the laws of the State of Oregon and forward my findings to DA's, Judges, and Jury's to decide what should be done. I have never nor will I ever pass judgement on someone who hasn't been convicted of a crime. That is not my job nor is it my place to sentence someone for there actions or nonactions. The judicial system isn't perfect, I will be the first to admit to that. However, right now it is all we have to work with.

In regards to that person being seen as a terroist or not. I don't beleive he had any intentions of placing people in terror. However, in this at edge world we live in I think he placed people in fear. Maybe not fear of their life but fear that if this person can do this what will he do next. When will it stop, will it stop if someone gets hurt or killed. Fear will make people do strange things and think in a manner that maybe they wouldn't usually think in. Yes oil kills many people, but it doesn't just come out and point a gun to someone and pull the trigger. It does it out of sight so for most it's out of mind or never thought of. I do agree that someday this world will die, no actualy just the people living on it because of the life styles they live.

Should he be sentenced to over 22 years? Like I said before, I work in an area that most of you if you saw me walking down the street would call me names and look at me with hate. The same hate that maybe helped sentence this person to a very long time in jail. Hate is an emotion of the weak that leads to criminal actions. Hate breeds hate and I think that has been proven time and time again. Yes there are bad cops that only see one side, just as some of the people who write in this media center just see one side. Those are the people that we remember and focus on. How many people remember the cop that save the life of someone, it happens everyday. Or how many people remember the one voice that made a difference regarding the environment, very few people remember. The news isn't so wrong, people want to see the bad in this world not the great and glorious things it has to offer. Just remember it doesn't take a trail, a person can move a mountain yet never leave a footprint.

Mr. Free was sentenced to three counts of Arson I. Measure 11 which was voted on in 1994 and passed with 2/3 majority, was place in action April 1st, 1995. If convicted of a Measure 11 crime the Judge has to sentence in accordance with the guidlines set forth by the people. Arson I has a mandatory seven years six months for each count. However, in order to be convicted of Measure 11 under the guidlines the person must present a threat of serious physical injury to another. Now I don't know much about this case so I can say that Mr. Free is guilty of placing someone else in harms way or not. So do I think he should sit in jail for over 22 years with the knowledge that no one was hurt, no it seems very harsh. 22 years is a long time to sit in jail when people who kill others get set free sooner. But again I don't know this case so maybe he did place someone in serious danger.

The area that I don't understand is why if this person is fighting against environmental issue he would harm the environment by burning three SUV's. What did that do to the environment? This person can't do much to help out the environment from behind bars. Nor can anyone else that has to resort to violence or illegal actions. I want your voices to be heard, the environment is a great thing to save, but at what cost to yourself are you will go to. Help the environment or what ever your views are by using your freedom of speech and lawful order, not by doing actions that only hurt your case or hurt someone else.

Have a great day.

Response to TT 25.Apr.2003 20:23

concerned citizen

Tree Topper:

(Excerps from the) Statement by Free upon his sentencing June 11th, 2001

I took every precaution to insure that no one would be injured by this fire. If I thought for any reason that anyone - be ... responding firefighters or police officers - would be injured, I never would have set this fire. It was not my intention to hurt anyone or place anyone at risk. I'm not going to ask the court to grant me leniency.

info from: www.freefreenow.org

Concerned citizen 25.Apr.2003 23:47

Tree Topper

Yes that tells me he took every precaution to not harm anyone, but it doesn't tell me if he did. All that I could find is something about a security guard, what that person injured?

Anyway, thanks.

What on earth? 26.Apr.2003 09:52

Common Sense

Are you people really serious?

Is an SUV worth 23 years of a man's life?

How the hell is burning a car terrorism? I know the media definition of terrorism may include burning a car or something, but do you personally believe that, for instance, Free burning a few SUVs should be in the same catagory as 9/11 or blowing up a bus full of civilians? I must have missed something really important, because I don't see the connection between a burning car and terror.

If some jackass goes and drinks and drives, and let's say they cause a huge accident, 3 cars for instance...is that terrorism? What if this drunk drivers not only kills a few people on their adventure, but in the process cause a few car fires....is that terrorism?

I didn't think so.


Open your eyes, I'm begging you...

Drunk drivers? 26.Apr.2003 10:27

me

No, I don't believe drunken assault with a vehicle is currently defined as terrorism. But I'd be thrilled if it were defined that way, especially in the case of repeat offenders. Whether called terrorism or just plain criminal behavior, drunk driving, especially when it causes accidents, injuries, etc ... should be a measure 11 criminal offense. No punishment is too horrific for these animals.

My personal choice for punishment would be to close a short stretch of the freeway for one day and force drunk drivers to use them while drunk. We could provide them within IV drips of 100 proof alcohol. We could put governors on the engines to prevent them from being driven below a certain speed. We could remove the brakes. Anyone left alive after the carnage might be made eligible for parole ... in about 50 years.

Just my take on it.

Poem by Jeffrey Luers 26.Apr.2003 15:19

none

poem by Free received April 20


My Goddess

I close my eyes,
I feel here presence,
an intoxicating rush.
My blood runs hot,
her power coursing through my veins.

She heals my wounds,
makes me whole
under her touch my spirit soars.
She breathes life.
Freely, I give mine.

Before her I stand naked
and humble.
Entranced by her beauty and grace.
She knows my heart,
my thoughts,
my secrets.

She is my home,
Where my soul finds peace.
With her
I'm never alone.

She is truth
She is power
She is magik
She is real
She is the Earth

She is my Goddess.