Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
More FBI repression out of Santa Cruz
More FBI visits and grand jury subpoenas.
We don't have much information as of yet.
Here is what we know:
Earlier in the week the FBI visited at least three people with court orders and collected DNA samples.
At least one individual has been subpoenaed to a San Francisco grand jury hearing on October 14th (we believe that's the correct date).
Again, things are just coming in and we will update as we have more information. Anyone effected by this should PLEASE PLEASE post here. We have to be as public as possible about this harrassment and organize resistance to this (and all) grand juries and other forms of FBI repression.
Here is what we know:
Earlier in the week the FBI visited at least three people with court orders and collected DNA samples.
At least one individual has been subpoenaed to a San Francisco grand jury hearing on October 14th (we believe that's the correct date).
Again, things are just coming in and we will update as we have more information. Anyone effected by this should PLEASE PLEASE post here. We have to be as public as possible about this harrassment and organize resistance to this (and all) grand juries and other forms of FBI repression.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Is collecting DNA samples from suspects of a crime automatically harassment? I'd be careful to make that generalization until we get more details about the reasons behind this. Innocent suspects should not fear DNA tests because they are scientifically accurate and if they are innocent should have nothing to worry about.
"Innocent suspects should not fear DNA tests because they are scientifically accurate and if they are innocent should have nothing to worry about." That's what cops + cop lovers have saidsicne time immemorium. When they conduct a witchhunt scientific accuracy and other matters can be ignored or changed. It's always to not volunteer anything, whether you're "gullty" or "innnocent". DON'T TALK TO THE FBI OR THE COPS.
well - I think the statement about the accuracy of DNA identification is off the wrong track. It's not that difficult to demonstrate that a cell sample matches a particular person. What is more contestable is showing that someone actually carried out a crime due to being present at a scene. For instance, let's imagine the FBI went to a location and picked up a variety of hairs, and then they go to a list of suspects and take samples. If there is a match, perhaps someone who was a nonparticipant in whatever they're studying there (such as the firebombing at UCSC) is positive, but really they just like attending vegan potlucks of these people whom they don't really know so well. Maybe they had no idea who the people are, but were shedding hair all over their house.
The National Lawyers Guild has established a hotline, 1-888-NLG-ECOLAW, for individuals arrested or subpoenaed for offenses related to environmental or animal rights activism.
Harassment by a Federal Grand Jury
By Sean R. Day, Attorney at Law
The process begins with the service of a subpoena. It must be handed to you or, if you refuse to accept it, placed near you. A subpoena duces tecum directs you to appear and produce a physical object.
If you fail to appear as directed, you can be arrested and held until your testimony. Whether you actually get arrested will depend on how badly they want you, and how easy you are to find.
If served with a subpoena duces tecum, file a written motion to quash the subpoena, especially where it directs you to produce privileged material or is unduly burdensome or harassing.
When it is a regular subpoena, unless you are asked to travel, it may be best not to file a motion to quash, since at least one federal circuit court has decided that any objections not litigated in the motion to quash are waived. Besides, most, if not all, objections you have to testifying cannot be dealt with except on a question-by-question basis.
If you appear, you will be taken into the grand jury room, which will have one or more prosecutors, a court reporter, and 16-23 grand jurors. Do not be intimidated. Grand jurors are simply citizens who have been selected for (grand) jury duty.
Begin writing down every question. You will be given an oath and first asked your name and address. Thereafter, if you have an attorney, most courts follow the rule that you may consult with your attorney after every question (though a couple courts have said after every few questions), although the prosecutor or grand jury may try to scare you into believing otherwise. Beginning with the first question, and every question thereafter, state, “I invoke my Fifth Amendment privilege.” And while there is no court decision stating that any other objections not raised are waived, it may be a good idea to add, “ . . . and reserve all other objections, privileges, and immunities.” You don’t want to be the first victim of a conservative judge bent on setting a precedent on the issue.
After raising your Fifth Amendment privilege a few times, the prosecutor will probably ask you if you intend to invoke your Fifth Amendment privilege to all questions. You can either say, “yes,” or you can say that you cannot know if you will answer a question until you hear it.
At this stage, you may be excused. Or, the prosecutor may seek to give you immunity, which must be approved by a judge. (Immunity could have been granted before you even got to court.) You will be taken before a judge for an immunity hearing, and the judge will likely rubber- stamp the request.
Thereafter, you cannot invoke your Fifth Amendment privilege because it will be moot. Except, when they start asking about other people you know, try asserting your Fifth Amendment privilege on the basis that the granting of immunity cannot protect you, because if such persons are charged with some sort of conspiracy in another case, admitting you know those persons could lead to your getting named as a defendant in such case.
Other bases for either objecting and/or refusing to answer any individual question, despite having been given immunity, include but are not limited to the following:
The question violates your First Amendment right to privacy of association and belief.
The purpose of the question is to harass you on the basis of your protected political and moral beliefs.
The question violates your constitutional right to privacy.
The purpose of the question is to gather intelligence, not to investigate or indict a potential crime.
You cannot answer the question because the question is ambiguous, complex and/or confusing, and any answer you give would tend to be confusing or misleading.
You cannot answer the question, as the question makes assumptions that might appear to be admitted no matter how you answer the question.
You cannot answer that question as it calls for an opinion you are not competent to give.
Attorney-client privilege.
Marital privilege.
Physician-client privilege.
Clergy-communicant privilege.
The question was derived from an illegal wiretap.
The prosecutor is badgering you.
The question is argumentative.
You refuse to answer on the ground that the purpose of the proceedings is not to investigate or indict a potential crime, but to gather intelligence, to harass you, and to terrorize and fragment the animal rights community.
You might also add: “I request that the grand jury be instructed that they have the power to dismiss the subpoena, and that they do so.” Check the prosecutor’s reaction to that one.
If the prosecutor wants to compel an answer, he or she will first have to take you before a judge for a hearing. Argue initially that you need more time and/or you want to brief the issue. Assuming that request is denied and your objections are overruled, the judge will order you to answer the question(s), and you will be taken back to the grand jury room.
At this point you have to decide whether to answer. Failure to answer will result in contempt, and you can be held until the end of the grand jury’s term (up to18 mos., depending on when they started; a “special” grand jury can get up to three 6-mo. extensions). Periodically thereafter, you can file a Grumbles motion (named after a court case), arguing that you will never answer their questions, and therefore your incarceration has become punitive and you should be released. If you decide to answer questions, you may become so stressed and rattled that you may suffer stress-induced amnesia, such that your answer to most, if not all, questions will be, “I don’t know” or “I can’t remember.” You might even ask to see a doctor. Don’t be alarmed. This condition should pass after you leave the grand jury room.
Important resources for dealing with and understanding Grand Juries:
http://security.resist.ca/personal/investigations.shtml#grandjury
http://fbiwitchhunt.com/grandjuryzine.pdf
Links to groups monitoring and/or working to support victims of Grand Juries:
http://www.fbiwitchhunt.com
http://www.grandjurydefense.org
http://www.cldc.org
By Sean R. Day, Attorney at Law
The process begins with the service of a subpoena. It must be handed to you or, if you refuse to accept it, placed near you. A subpoena duces tecum directs you to appear and produce a physical object.
If you fail to appear as directed, you can be arrested and held until your testimony. Whether you actually get arrested will depend on how badly they want you, and how easy you are to find.
If served with a subpoena duces tecum, file a written motion to quash the subpoena, especially where it directs you to produce privileged material or is unduly burdensome or harassing.
When it is a regular subpoena, unless you are asked to travel, it may be best not to file a motion to quash, since at least one federal circuit court has decided that any objections not litigated in the motion to quash are waived. Besides, most, if not all, objections you have to testifying cannot be dealt with except on a question-by-question basis.
If you appear, you will be taken into the grand jury room, which will have one or more prosecutors, a court reporter, and 16-23 grand jurors. Do not be intimidated. Grand jurors are simply citizens who have been selected for (grand) jury duty.
Begin writing down every question. You will be given an oath and first asked your name and address. Thereafter, if you have an attorney, most courts follow the rule that you may consult with your attorney after every question (though a couple courts have said after every few questions), although the prosecutor or grand jury may try to scare you into believing otherwise. Beginning with the first question, and every question thereafter, state, “I invoke my Fifth Amendment privilege.” And while there is no court decision stating that any other objections not raised are waived, it may be a good idea to add, “ . . . and reserve all other objections, privileges, and immunities.” You don’t want to be the first victim of a conservative judge bent on setting a precedent on the issue.
After raising your Fifth Amendment privilege a few times, the prosecutor will probably ask you if you intend to invoke your Fifth Amendment privilege to all questions. You can either say, “yes,” or you can say that you cannot know if you will answer a question until you hear it.
At this stage, you may be excused. Or, the prosecutor may seek to give you immunity, which must be approved by a judge. (Immunity could have been granted before you even got to court.) You will be taken before a judge for an immunity hearing, and the judge will likely rubber- stamp the request.
Thereafter, you cannot invoke your Fifth Amendment privilege because it will be moot. Except, when they start asking about other people you know, try asserting your Fifth Amendment privilege on the basis that the granting of immunity cannot protect you, because if such persons are charged with some sort of conspiracy in another case, admitting you know those persons could lead to your getting named as a defendant in such case.
Other bases for either objecting and/or refusing to answer any individual question, despite having been given immunity, include but are not limited to the following:
The question violates your First Amendment right to privacy of association and belief.
The purpose of the question is to harass you on the basis of your protected political and moral beliefs.
The question violates your constitutional right to privacy.
The purpose of the question is to gather intelligence, not to investigate or indict a potential crime.
You cannot answer the question because the question is ambiguous, complex and/or confusing, and any answer you give would tend to be confusing or misleading.
You cannot answer the question, as the question makes assumptions that might appear to be admitted no matter how you answer the question.
You cannot answer that question as it calls for an opinion you are not competent to give.
Attorney-client privilege.
Marital privilege.
Physician-client privilege.
Clergy-communicant privilege.
The question was derived from an illegal wiretap.
The prosecutor is badgering you.
The question is argumentative.
You refuse to answer on the ground that the purpose of the proceedings is not to investigate or indict a potential crime, but to gather intelligence, to harass you, and to terrorize and fragment the animal rights community.
You might also add: “I request that the grand jury be instructed that they have the power to dismiss the subpoena, and that they do so.” Check the prosecutor’s reaction to that one.
If the prosecutor wants to compel an answer, he or she will first have to take you before a judge for a hearing. Argue initially that you need more time and/or you want to brief the issue. Assuming that request is denied and your objections are overruled, the judge will order you to answer the question(s), and you will be taken back to the grand jury room.
At this point you have to decide whether to answer. Failure to answer will result in contempt, and you can be held until the end of the grand jury’s term (up to18 mos., depending on when they started; a “special” grand jury can get up to three 6-mo. extensions). Periodically thereafter, you can file a Grumbles motion (named after a court case), arguing that you will never answer their questions, and therefore your incarceration has become punitive and you should be released. If you decide to answer questions, you may become so stressed and rattled that you may suffer stress-induced amnesia, such that your answer to most, if not all, questions will be, “I don’t know” or “I can’t remember.” You might even ask to see a doctor. Don’t be alarmed. This condition should pass after you leave the grand jury room.
Important resources for dealing with and understanding Grand Juries:
http://security.resist.ca/personal/investigations.shtml#grandjury
http://fbiwitchhunt.com/grandjuryzine.pdf
Links to groups monitoring and/or working to support victims of Grand Juries:
http://www.fbiwitchhunt.com
http://www.grandjurydefense.org
http://www.cldc.org
Above it says that the FBI came to someone's house or apartment and demanded dna samples.
The firebombing was really bad and I hope the person really reforms themself or leaves the state for a while.
From some newspaper articles, or perhaps from bad movies or television, it is easy to pick up a notion that the police have to trick people into giving up a samples. Perhaps the difference here is that they have a court order? Or is there another legal factor here. I swear I've read stories about investigators who suspected that such-and-such mafia member did something, but they can't get a dna sample from them, so they get it from an envelope licked by them, or grabbing their paper cup at a restaurant after it is tossed away. Under what circumstances could someone refuse to give a cheek swab?
here's an example http://www.komonews.com/news/7443061.html This was a murder so it's a serious crime. Is the situation that they had no other evidence linking this man so they couldn't get an order?
The firebombing was really bad and I hope the person really reforms themself or leaves the state for a while.
From some newspaper articles, or perhaps from bad movies or television, it is easy to pick up a notion that the police have to trick people into giving up a samples. Perhaps the difference here is that they have a court order? Or is there another legal factor here. I swear I've read stories about investigators who suspected that such-and-such mafia member did something, but they can't get a dna sample from them, so they get it from an envelope licked by them, or grabbing their paper cup at a restaurant after it is tossed away. Under what circumstances could someone refuse to give a cheek swab?
here's an example http://www.komonews.com/news/7443061.html This was a murder so it's a serious crime. Is the situation that they had no other evidence linking this man so they couldn't get an order?
The accurate date on the grand jury hearing is October 23.
Once I posted here about the same detail, but for some reason I'm held up on the fact that no press release to ALF was ever sent out. Even if there was a scenario of a underinformed individual (which would explain some of the other elements), they still would have had time to read newspaper stories about it and send something in. ALF always has these press statements so that the message and intentions are clear.
If I had time, I would do an indybay story involving assembling a list of cases of foreclosure arsons for insurance money that are breaking out because prices on houses are so high that there aren't enough doctors and computer programmers who can buy them. That is a bit different from the UC stuff, but there are a couple cases where ELF was implicated, but arson was highly likely http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,334539,00.html. Some regions of California are filled with empty houses as though a tornado blew through. So, basically, in the next two years, if there are any arsons attributed to ELF, maybe we should be suspicious. There isn't much new construction planned any time soon. http://kcet.org/socal/2008/09/foreclosure-alley.html
If I had time, I would do an indybay story involving assembling a list of cases of foreclosure arsons for insurance money that are breaking out because prices on houses are so high that there aren't enough doctors and computer programmers who can buy them. That is a bit different from the UC stuff, but there are a couple cases where ELF was implicated, but arson was highly likely http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,334539,00.html. Some regions of California are filled with empty houses as though a tornado blew through. So, basically, in the next two years, if there are any arsons attributed to ELF, maybe we should be suspicious. There isn't much new construction planned any time soon. http://kcet.org/socal/2008/09/foreclosure-alley.html
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$155.00 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