Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Norse Trial Postponed To May 22nd
Originally scheduled for this week, my trial for "disrupting a public meeting" (i.e. standing at the podium of a City Council meeting and asking for my two minutes to speak) and "resisting arrest" (i.e. not leaving the room until I was told I was under arrest, in spite of a painful come-along hold by Lt. Clark that injured my left hand), has been rescheduled for May 22nd.
AP0LOGIES AND ISSUES
My apologies to those who showed up this week and found no trial nor mention of me on the court dockets.
The issue in this case is the shortened public comment rules specially tailered for me and a few others at City Council by then-Mayor Mike Rotkin and Councilmember Ed Porter. The so-called Five Minute rule for Consent Agenda Items and the Three/One Minute rule for Administrative Items has significantly limited public discussion.
After the Coast Santa Cruz Hotel debacle last spring, Rotkin seemed particularly eager to cut back public input.
He has a history of using other parliamentary and extra-parliamentary devices to avoid hearing my brief comments.
CASE HISTORY
For two sympathetic treatments see:
"A Santa Cruz homeless advocate is brutalized and shackled while the public voice is eroded"
by Becky Johnson at
http://www.thestreetspirit.org/July2005/arrested.htm
&
Having Your Say At City Council Meetings Is a Right, Not A Privilege by Thomas Leavitt at
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/18359/index.php
For the City Council minutes version see:
http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/ cc/archives/05/mins_pdf/6-14Rmin.pdf
For some discussion of the Five-Minute Rule under which I was arrested see:
"Rotkin's Council To Cut Back Public Comment"
by Robert Norse at http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17159/index.php
For the Sentinel version:
Speaker pushes Santa Cruz City Council´s limits "Tighter time for public comment angers advocate June 24, 2005" at
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2005/June/24/local/stories/07local.htm
And my response:
"City Council knows how to muzzle critics" By Robert Norse August 14, 2005 at
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2005/August/14/edit/stories/03edit.htm
UPDATE
The case has been repeatedly postponed, most recently at the request of prosecutor Archie Webber, who said he had a DUI case he wanted to do first.
Webber has been insistent on prosecuting this case, and denied me access to a tape recording which I made of the City Council meeting that day, until a court order forced him to let me hear and examine it--some four months after my original request.
Apparently top D.A. Bob Lee also wants this case to go forward, or so he informed attorney Kate Wells, who, with Berkeley attorney David Beauvais, are pro bono attorneys defending me.
I face a potential 1 1/2 years in jail, not as unlikely a possibility as it might seem, though I've never been convicted of an offense in Santa Cruz County for which I've served time. I am currently uninterested in plea bargaining or in taking probation, which means I'm likely to be locked up if found guilty. There is also an uncertain history of folks being freed pending appeal.
HELP WANTED
If anyone wants to help interview witnesses, do legal research, or help put out public information on this case, please contact me at 831-423-4833. I can use the help.
The case will be listed on the court calendar under my family name Robert N. Kahn. It will begin in Dept. 1, probably around 9 AM, be farmed out to another court (we don't know which one), and then jury selection will begin. The actual trial will probably not start until the afternoon or the next morning. It is expected to take several days to a week.
I am suing City of Santa Cruz, the SCPD, and Mayors Krohn, Fitzmaurice, and Kennedy in federal court in a civil suit tentatively scheduled for jury trial in September. The suit claims a pattern of harassment and repression at City Council, most visibly involving false arrests in March 2002 (the so-called "Heil Krohn!" case) and January 2004 (the Kennedy "Hush the Homeless" case).
See "Santa Cruz City Council Will Face Trial in mock-Nazi salute case" by Robert Norse http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/13163/index.php
For regular updates and schedule changes, tune in to Bathrobespierre's Broadsides at 101.1 FM 6-8 PM Thursdays, 9:30 AM- 1 PM Sundays on Free Radio Santa Cruz. Or check out indybay.org .
You can also check archived shows at http://www.huffsantacruz .org if you miss a show. Shows are usually archived a day or two after they air.
My apologies to those who showed up this week and found no trial nor mention of me on the court dockets.
The issue in this case is the shortened public comment rules specially tailered for me and a few others at City Council by then-Mayor Mike Rotkin and Councilmember Ed Porter. The so-called Five Minute rule for Consent Agenda Items and the Three/One Minute rule for Administrative Items has significantly limited public discussion.
After the Coast Santa Cruz Hotel debacle last spring, Rotkin seemed particularly eager to cut back public input.
He has a history of using other parliamentary and extra-parliamentary devices to avoid hearing my brief comments.
CASE HISTORY
For two sympathetic treatments see:
"A Santa Cruz homeless advocate is brutalized and shackled while the public voice is eroded"
by Becky Johnson at
http://www.thestreetspirit.org/July2005/arrested.htm
&
Having Your Say At City Council Meetings Is a Right, Not A Privilege by Thomas Leavitt at
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/18359/index.php
For the City Council minutes version see:
http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/ cc/archives/05/mins_pdf/6-14Rmin.pdf
For some discussion of the Five-Minute Rule under which I was arrested see:
"Rotkin's Council To Cut Back Public Comment"
by Robert Norse at http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17159/index.php
For the Sentinel version:
Speaker pushes Santa Cruz City Council´s limits "Tighter time for public comment angers advocate June 24, 2005" at
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2005/June/24/local/stories/07local.htm
And my response:
"City Council knows how to muzzle critics" By Robert Norse August 14, 2005 at
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2005/August/14/edit/stories/03edit.htm
UPDATE
The case has been repeatedly postponed, most recently at the request of prosecutor Archie Webber, who said he had a DUI case he wanted to do first.
Webber has been insistent on prosecuting this case, and denied me access to a tape recording which I made of the City Council meeting that day, until a court order forced him to let me hear and examine it--some four months after my original request.
Apparently top D.A. Bob Lee also wants this case to go forward, or so he informed attorney Kate Wells, who, with Berkeley attorney David Beauvais, are pro bono attorneys defending me.
I face a potential 1 1/2 years in jail, not as unlikely a possibility as it might seem, though I've never been convicted of an offense in Santa Cruz County for which I've served time. I am currently uninterested in plea bargaining or in taking probation, which means I'm likely to be locked up if found guilty. There is also an uncertain history of folks being freed pending appeal.
HELP WANTED
If anyone wants to help interview witnesses, do legal research, or help put out public information on this case, please contact me at 831-423-4833. I can use the help.
The case will be listed on the court calendar under my family name Robert N. Kahn. It will begin in Dept. 1, probably around 9 AM, be farmed out to another court (we don't know which one), and then jury selection will begin. The actual trial will probably not start until the afternoon or the next morning. It is expected to take several days to a week.
I am suing City of Santa Cruz, the SCPD, and Mayors Krohn, Fitzmaurice, and Kennedy in federal court in a civil suit tentatively scheduled for jury trial in September. The suit claims a pattern of harassment and repression at City Council, most visibly involving false arrests in March 2002 (the so-called "Heil Krohn!" case) and January 2004 (the Kennedy "Hush the Homeless" case).
See "Santa Cruz City Council Will Face Trial in mock-Nazi salute case" by Robert Norse http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/13163/index.php
For regular updates and schedule changes, tune in to Bathrobespierre's Broadsides at 101.1 FM 6-8 PM Thursdays, 9:30 AM- 1 PM Sundays on Free Radio Santa Cruz. Or check out indybay.org .
You can also check archived shows at http://www.huffsantacruz .org if you miss a show. Shows are usually archived a day or two after they air.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Robert Norse has been the repeated victim of government repression in Santa Cruz, CA for his outspoken defense of the homeless from a city government and police force hostile to the poor and leftist activists.
The continuing police and DA harassment of Robert Norse shares glaring similarities to what the local City government has done repeatedly to other local activists who have taken up the same issues and challenged the local government.
See: Homelessness and Political Repression, The Green Party Fails The Test In Santa Cruz, CA http://lists.topica.com/lists/NewHampshireHomeless/read/message.html?mid=904029610
Repression is nothing but politics by other means than the lies of the ruling class’s politicians and reporters.
The tools of repression can include the violence of clubs, guns, tear gas, torture, forced medication, the death penalty, and arrests and trials without cause. Alone against these tools of the ruling class we are almost helpless.
The antidote to repression is the politics of the people, solidarity when an injury is done to us. It is this that has checked the hands of our government somewhat and brought a facade of decency and democracy to a government founded on chattel slavery and genocide against Native Americans that has since graduated to imperialism and wage slavery.
An injury to one is an injury to all!
Drop the charges against Robert Norse!
End the sleeping ban!
Stop the criminalization of poverty and political activism, down with the Santa Cruz City Council! For building a leftist alternative of the people!
Liberation News
http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news
The continuing police and DA harassment of Robert Norse shares glaring similarities to what the local City government has done repeatedly to other local activists who have taken up the same issues and challenged the local government.
See: Homelessness and Political Repression, The Green Party Fails The Test In Santa Cruz, CA http://lists.topica.com/lists/NewHampshireHomeless/read/message.html?mid=904029610
Repression is nothing but politics by other means than the lies of the ruling class’s politicians and reporters.
The tools of repression can include the violence of clubs, guns, tear gas, torture, forced medication, the death penalty, and arrests and trials without cause. Alone against these tools of the ruling class we are almost helpless.
The antidote to repression is the politics of the people, solidarity when an injury is done to us. It is this that has checked the hands of our government somewhat and brought a facade of decency and democracy to a government founded on chattel slavery and genocide against Native Americans that has since graduated to imperialism and wage slavery.
An injury to one is an injury to all!
Drop the charges against Robert Norse!
End the sleeping ban!
Stop the criminalization of poverty and political activism, down with the Santa Cruz City Council! For building a leftist alternative of the people!
Liberation News
http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news
This is a huge waste of taxpayer money, prosecutorial time, and is politically motivated. Robert Norse neither disrupted a city council meeting by waiting in line, approaching the microphone, and asking to speak on an agenda item as every other member of the community is (or was) allowed to do, prior to Rotkin's special interest legislation which, I believe, illegally prevents members of the public from speaking on all items on the agenda.
Lt. Steve Clark (who has a nasty record of abusing homeless people) failed to inform Norse he was under arrest, despite Robert's repeatedly asking IF he was under arrest. Clark twisted Norse's arm so badly he screamed in pain, and once he applied the cuffs, they were too tight and caused nerve damage.
While in handcuffs, Clark marched Norse to the car and ignored his plea to stop since Norse's shorts were falling to his ankles.
The result was public humiliation which was entirely Clark's fault.
Clark then proceeded to chastise Norse for "purposely" letting his pants fall, despite that Norse was in cuffs and unable to pull his pants up or to make them fall intentionally.
Then, while still in handcuffs, Clark threatened Norse with bodily injury "I will hurt you" and expressed anger that Clark had been named in Norse's federal lawsuit.
The only reason this prosecution is proceeding is because the council has had Norse arrested so many times (FOUR!!) and had to drop the charges in each case. They must proceed with a prosecution or appear to just be arresting Norse as a form of harassment.
All people who believe in the right of the public to speak at City Council as provided for by the Brown Act should call Mike Rotkin and tell him to rescind his 5-minute rule for consent agenda items.
All people who believe in fair treatment and justice should call Mayor Mathews and the City Council and demand that charges be dropped.
Lt. Steve Clark (who has a nasty record of abusing homeless people) failed to inform Norse he was under arrest, despite Robert's repeatedly asking IF he was under arrest. Clark twisted Norse's arm so badly he screamed in pain, and once he applied the cuffs, they were too tight and caused nerve damage.
While in handcuffs, Clark marched Norse to the car and ignored his plea to stop since Norse's shorts were falling to his ankles.
The result was public humiliation which was entirely Clark's fault.
Clark then proceeded to chastise Norse for "purposely" letting his pants fall, despite that Norse was in cuffs and unable to pull his pants up or to make them fall intentionally.
Then, while still in handcuffs, Clark threatened Norse with bodily injury "I will hurt you" and expressed anger that Clark had been named in Norse's federal lawsuit.
The only reason this prosecution is proceeding is because the council has had Norse arrested so many times (FOUR!!) and had to drop the charges in each case. They must proceed with a prosecution or appear to just be arresting Norse as a form of harassment.
All people who believe in the right of the public to speak at City Council as provided for by the Brown Act should call Mike Rotkin and tell him to rescind his 5-minute rule for consent agenda items.
All people who believe in fair treatment and justice should call Mayor Mathews and the City Council and demand that charges be dropped.
Imagine getting robbed on the streets. Nobody who you know does anything but express sympathy. Then, they whisper to each other "What was he doing on the streets anyway? He must have deserved it." Then, when you knock on doors people are afraid to answer. Then, when you get to a lawyer's office to sue your assailants, who happen to be the police, you are told that they won't take your case on contingency.
Then you start to realize that the police are only doing their jobs - to protect the wealthy and powerful from their potential competitors at the bottom.
The public meeting that Robert was allegedly disrupting was no public meeting. It was a meeting among members of private, special interest groups whose mandate has been to clientize the rich.
There are no paid jobs in Santa Cruz for us. Capital is tight for every little rented cubbyhole of a business. There have been no meaningful college admissions available. UCSC and the other schools have been for the rich (including "the rich in denial"). They teach discrimination against their rejects. Society's oppressions are then allocated against us while the powers that be remain smug and chortle at the thought.
Then you start to realize that the police are only doing their jobs - to protect the wealthy and powerful from their potential competitors at the bottom.
The public meeting that Robert was allegedly disrupting was no public meeting. It was a meeting among members of private, special interest groups whose mandate has been to clientize the rich.
There are no paid jobs in Santa Cruz for us. Capital is tight for every little rented cubbyhole of a business. There have been no meaningful college admissions available. UCSC and the other schools have been for the rich (including "the rich in denial"). They teach discrimination against their rejects. Society's oppressions are then allocated against us while the powers that be remain smug and chortle at the thought.
My jury trial for "disrupting a meeting" and "obstructing an officer" has been postponed to September 11 in Dept. 1 (probably at 9 AM).
Previously scheduled for Monday May 22nd, apparent police, D.A., or judicial misconduct has forced them to grant an extraordinary continuance (usually misdemeanor cases have to be concluded within 120 days of arraignment).
It seems the SCPD, the D.A., or the examining Judge have been concealing complaints against Lt. Clark, which the defense is entitled to know about (at least, who's complaining and how that person can be contacted).
The complainant, a former D.A. investigator, is currently in Europe, and won't be back til mid-summer.
Apparently SCPD Police chief Skerry himself has sustained at least one complaint against Clark for misuse of information. A second complaint against him for lying is also at issue (though apparently not sustained). Whether sustained or not, we're entitled to have access to the names and phone numbers of who filed the complaints, so we can use them as witnesses to impeach Clark.
That hearing will be taking place June 11th at 9 AM in Dept. 1, for those interested. I'll also be trying to get attorney David Beauvais to discuss the issue tomorrow on Free Radio Santa Cruz (11 AM Sunday May 21 at http://www.freakradio.org and/or 101.1 FM).
The show will be archived at http://www.huffsantacruz.org .
I regret to say that two comments--at least one of them by homeless activist Becky Johnson--were removed from this thread. She has spent a lot of time helping prepare the defense in this trial.
Since all "hidden" comments have now been destroyed and apparently there is no hidden category, there's no way to get access to them again.
I understand Johnson is no longer banned (at least on homeless topics) and appreciate this change of policy. But I regret the lost comments.
Thanks to both her and to indymedia for helping get the issue out to the public.
Previously scheduled for Monday May 22nd, apparent police, D.A., or judicial misconduct has forced them to grant an extraordinary continuance (usually misdemeanor cases have to be concluded within 120 days of arraignment).
It seems the SCPD, the D.A., or the examining Judge have been concealing complaints against Lt. Clark, which the defense is entitled to know about (at least, who's complaining and how that person can be contacted).
The complainant, a former D.A. investigator, is currently in Europe, and won't be back til mid-summer.
Apparently SCPD Police chief Skerry himself has sustained at least one complaint against Clark for misuse of information. A second complaint against him for lying is also at issue (though apparently not sustained). Whether sustained or not, we're entitled to have access to the names and phone numbers of who filed the complaints, so we can use them as witnesses to impeach Clark.
That hearing will be taking place June 11th at 9 AM in Dept. 1, for those interested. I'll also be trying to get attorney David Beauvais to discuss the issue tomorrow on Free Radio Santa Cruz (11 AM Sunday May 21 at http://www.freakradio.org and/or 101.1 FM).
The show will be archived at http://www.huffsantacruz.org .
I regret to say that two comments--at least one of them by homeless activist Becky Johnson--were removed from this thread. She has spent a lot of time helping prepare the defense in this trial.
Since all "hidden" comments have now been destroyed and apparently there is no hidden category, there's no way to get access to them again.
I understand Johnson is no longer banned (at least on homeless topics) and appreciate this change of policy. But I regret the lost comments.
Thanks to both her and to indymedia for helping get the issue out to the public.
For more information:
http://www.huffsantacruz.org
I anticipate that the charges against Norse will be dropped. Why expose what SCPD is efficient in concealing. Providing you look in the right places, you will discover additional complaints against this officer that are well hidden beneath the surface of the SCPD. The complaints are labled "inquiries" or "informal" (if not thrown out), including those which have been "investigated". SCPD encourages the complainant to make the complaint an "inquiry". The complainant then receives assurance from the police chief that "action against the officer has been taken." Who (other than SCPD) really knows what action follows. Hmmm...Good idea for Ms. Wells to attempt to encourage that all "inquiries" and complaints against officers be sent over to the Grand Jury. I don't anticipate this happening. Although, one can certainly appreciate her efforts.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$470.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network