Statement of Support for Marie Mason
From: freemarie@riseup.net
Date: Wed, September 10, 2008
Below is a statement of support we received from attorney Lauren Reagan of
the Civil Liberties Defense Center. Lauren has been instrumental in
helping Marie navigate this treacherous path. As bad as things are right
now without Laurens experience and insight they easily could have been a
lot worse.
Though we have never met Lauren and have only come in contact in times of
crisis we know from experience that like Marie, Lauren has a strong
understanding of the term Solidarity. We are grateful for her efforts in
support of our friend Marie Mason and all Non cooperating Green Scare
prisoners.
In Solidarity,
Got Your Back Collective
www.freemarie.org
Dear friends,
I, and the Civil Liberties Defense Center have been assisting
non-cooperating defendants dragged into the Green Scare prosecutions of
environmental and animal rights activists since late 2005 (grand juries as
far back as 02!). Marie Mason is one of those activists currently facing
life in prison as the result of a snitch who was also her husband until
they recently divorced. I have worked with her and her attorney since
shortly after her indictment. Her attorney utilized our plea agreements
from the Oregon non-cooperating defendants' cases in negotiating Marie's
case. Her attorney has provided me with, and I have reviewed all of the
court documents in her case including her plea agreement.
I state with unequivocal confidence and knowledge that Marie has been
absolutely stalwart in her commitment to not cooperate with the
government, and to do no act that would damage the larger environmental
movement in any way. She is an amazingly strong woman and I wish I had met
her before her legal troubles began. Her plea agreement and negotiations
do not require her to provide any information at all, other than to admit
her own crimes in open court. The feds wanted their boy Ambrose to also be
listed in the crimes that Marie is pleading to and to which Ambrose not
only admitted, but gave up info on anything and everything he could think
of. She has never confirmed or denied his role in any crime, but based
upon the feds insistence that he be named in her plea counts, she will
agree in court that if the feds say he did it, and Ambrose himself has
sung like a canary, then so be it. Ambrose made his own bed long ago (see
below). Like the other noncooperating defendants, the government could
subpoena her to a grand jury or trial in the future. It would be her
choice at that point whether to cooperate or not. Based upon the fact that
she was willing to go to trial and face the rest of her life in prison if
she was not offered a pure non-cooperation deal, I think we can speculate
as to her decision if she was merely facing a contempt charge. Hopefully
that will not happen.
Marie has not received any favors or special treatment by the US Attorneys
prosecuting her in Michigan; in fact, it is despicable that Marie may do
more time then any other Green Scare defendant to date as a result of her
choice to not snitch. Marie joins Jonathan Paul, Daniel McGowan, Sadie,
Exile, Briana Waters, Tre Arrow, Rod Coronado, Eric McDavid and several
others I am probably forgetting to mention --these folks are
wholeheartedly deserving of our support as activists that have maintained
their integrity in the face of political persecution by the federal
government. They will do extra days or years in prison as a result of
their refusal to give information to the feds used to prosecute others.
Please take a moment to familiarize yourself with Marie's situation. If
you are able to contribute financially, I'm sure they would deeply
appreciate it, and if not, please show solidarity for Marie as she goes
through the process of being yanked away from her children and family for
a long time.
Peace,
Lauren C. Regan, Attorney at Law
The Civil Liberties Defense Center
1 comment:
Maybe Marie would not be yanked from her children if she would stop breaking the law.
I guess that they are admitting that the ex-husband is telling the truth. When they call someone a snitch, they usually mean they are telling the truth. They are called "snitches" because they are telling the truth as opposed to lying about a specific event.
"Her plea agreement and negotiations
do not require her to provide any information at all, other than to admit
her own crimes in open court."
So, what we have here is less than honest accounting of what other criminals have done. She is refusing to tell the truth about other criminal acts. Not exactly an honest or responsible person, is she?
Why are these people always so upset when someone tells the truth? The answer is easy. They know what they are doing is wrong. They are not proud of it. If they were, they would proudly admit the facts of their actions, but like cowards, they hide behind lies and dishonesty. They are completely untrustworthy, but that is what is expected from criminals.
"Marie has not received any favors or special treatment by the US Attorneys prosecuting her in Michigan; in fact, it is despicable that Marie may do more time then any other Green Scare defendant to date as a result of her choice to not snitch."
To these people like Lauren Reagan, Marie should be commended for her lack of truthfulness. All Marie has done is to maintain her criminal integrity. Of course, this means that she has no problem with her actions and would probably re-offend just as soon as she is released.
Post a Comment