Friday, February 29, 2008

2-29-08 Briana Waters trial is in deliberations.

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2008/02/372847.shtml

2-29-08 Briana Waters trial is in deliberations.
author: courtwatch

2-29-08 Brianna Waters trial is in deliberations and could be done today.
The trial part of the Briana Waters case is over as of this morning when
the jury was given last instructions by the court to begin deliberations.
This morning, The defense objected to the prosecution's closing statement
and called for a mistrial. The objections were based on the grounds that
Mr Bartlett misspoke about several points during his closing statement.
The worse one was that he referenced and placed on the jury's screen an
exhibit that had not been offered nor admitted to the court. The exhibit
in question was Justin Solondz's bank records during the time of May 2001.
There was an ATM withdrawal on May 19th 2001 of $200. This was the same
day that Rob Corina rented a car allegedly at the request of Brianna
Waters. The prosecution claimed that Justin gave the $200 to Briana to pay
for the car rental which was about $187. Mr Corina had deposited $200 to
his bank account the next week. The defense motioned for a mistrial in
light of the fact that the prosecution was using the car rental records as
well as Lacey Phillabaum's and Rob Corina's testimonies to tie Brianna to
the arson at the Center for Urban Horticulture. The prosection didn't
think the exhibit was of enough importance to have a mistrial. The Defense
did. Suprise suprise, Judge Bergess chose to not allow a mistrial and
called the jury in to give curative instuctions so that the bank records
of Justin Solondz were not to be taken into account when discussing the
verdict. The Defense has made an objection for the record to help
facilitate an appeal if needed.

The Olympian: Arson case goes to jury [Waters trial]

http://www.theolympian.com/news/story/374365.html

Arson case goes to jury

Christian Hill
The Olympian

TACOMA — A jury will begin deliberations this morning in the trial of a
former Olympia resident accused of participating in an arson that
destroyed a University of Washington research center nearly seven years ago.

The government contends Briana Waters, 32, served as a lookout as four
co-conspirators broke into the UW's Center of Urban Horticulture and
placed an incendiary device that burst into flame around 3 a.m. on May 21,
2001. Waters, who now lives in Oakland, Calif., has denied involvement in
the arson and said she likely was asleep in Olympia when it occurred. She
was attending The Evergreen State College at the time.

She faces a mandatory minimum sentence of 35 years in prison, if convicted
of all crimes, including arson, conspiracy and use of a destructive device
during a crime of violence. Attorneys for the government and Waters used
their closing arguments Thursday in U.S. District Court in Tacoma to focus
on the testimony of two women who confessed to their role in the arson and
separately took the stand to identify Waters as a co-conspirator.

Prosecutors said the testimony of Jennifer Kolar, Lacey Phillabaum and
others corroborated physical evidence they could not know existed unless
they were telling the truth.

They said Waters' defense counsel had no factual evidence to undercut
their theory of Waters' involvement in the arson, leaving her to claim she
is telling the truth while everyone else is lying.

"Her lies tell you she's guilty," First Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark
Bartlett told the jurors. "She can't tell you a better story than this."

Waters' attorney, Robert Bloom, countered that the government's case was
built on the word of two women — whom he described as "criminals" — who
agreed to cooperate with prosecutors in exchange for lesser prison
sentences.

"She has lied in this very courtroom," Bloom said of Kolar, "and they're
asking you to rely on her to convict Briana Waters."

Bloom said both women had reasons to be bitter at Waters. Waters testified
that she turned down a sexual advance by Kolar and had a heated
confrontation with Phillabaum about Phillabaum's alleged sexual encounter
with Waters' then-boyfriend, Justin Soldondz.

Prosecutors allege Soldondz was part of the five-member team and is now a
fugitive. William Rodgers, a close friend of Waters and the apparent
ringleader in this and other arsons, committed suicide in an Arizona jail
cell shortly after his arrest in 2005.

"This woman is innocent," Bloom said. "She didn't do this. The evidence
that has been presented is not credible evidence."

Bartlett acknowledge that both women had a motive to cooperate with
prosecutors. What, he asked, was their motive in identifying Waters? To
conspire together to frame an innocent woman?

"That's just a bunch of garbage, and you know it," he told the jurors.

The attorneys also sparred over whether Waters' stop at Ralph's Thriftway
in Olympia about eight hours before the fire proved she had an alibi.

A record provided by her defense team shows Waters made a $13 purchase at
Ralph's at 7:12 p.m., and Bloom said she wouldn't have had time to get to
Seattle and meet the group at a restaurant before they drove to the UW
campus.

Prosecutors countered that Waters had time to arrive at the restaurant
between 8 and 9 p.m., the hour the two women testified the group gathered.
An FBI agent testified earlier in the day that he made the trip from the
grocery store to the Seattle restaurant Wednesday evening in 68 minutes.

"This is some kind of exculpatory evidence?" Bartlett asked, referring to
the receipt. "Don't be ridiculous."

But Waters' defense team held fast, documenting there was Interstate 5
construction and local road closures that evening that would have
lengthened the commute.

"It's not 68 minutes," Bloom said. "It's an hour and 68 minutes."

Waters asked her cousin to secure the rental car that she and other
co-conspirators drove to Seattle, telling him she would be able to move
some of her belongings from his home. The evening before the arson, Waters
asked to borrow the car because she was ill and needed to go to the
emergency room. Representatives of Providence St. Peter Hospital and
Capital Medical Center said they had no records of her going to their
emergency rooms. She later told her cousin she drove to Seattle to receive
treatment.

Soldondz's bank records show he withdrew $200 in cash on May 19, the day
the car was rented. Waters' cousin deposited $200 in cash — his lone cash
deposit of the year — several days later.

Prosecutors allege Waters was a member of a cell of the Animal Liberation
Front and Earth Liberation Front known as "The Family," whose members set
or attempted to set at least 17 fires between 1996 and 2001 throughout the
Northwest and in Colorado.

The group wanted to destroy corporate and government operations they
thought were harming the environment and animals, and prosecutors said
they targeted the UW research center under the mistaken belief that
genetic engineering of poplar trees was taking place there.

Another arson occurred on the same morning at an Oregon poplar farm,
allegedly by another five-member group of the ALF/ELF cell.

The center was rebuilt at a cost of $7 million and reopened three years ago.

Christian Hill covers the city of Lacey and military for The Olympian. He
can be reached at 360-754-5427 or chill@theolympian.com.

Avelino Gonzalez Claudio pleads NOT GUILTY

Not Guilty Plea In 1983 Armed Robbery

By EDMUND H. MAHONY Courant Staff Writer February 29, 2008

Avelino Gonzalez Claudio, a reputed member of the militant Puerto Rico independence group Los Macheteros, pleaded not guilty Thursday in U.S. District Court in Hartford to more than a dozen charges connected to the 1983 armed robbery of $7.1 million from the former Wells Fargo armored car depot in West Hartford.

Gonzalez, 65, a fugitive for more than 20 years, was captured in Puerto Rico by the FBI on Feb. 7. He is believed to have lived on the island since the robbery and, at least recently, was teaching at a private school under an assumed name.

After two brief court appearances on the island this month, a U.S. District judge in Puerto Rico ordered him transferred to Hartford, where he now is scheduled to stand trial for participating in what, in 1983, was the largest cash robbery in U.S. history.

He is accused of multiple counts of robbery by force of a federally insured bank, conspiracy to interfere with commerce by robbery, the interstate or foreign transport of stolen goods, and conspiracy against the United States.

Records seized from Los Macheteros in Puerto Rico more than two decades ago show that the group, which means machete wielders or cane cutters in Spanish, intended to use the money to further its armed struggle for independence from the U.S. and to support leftist insurgencies in Latin America.

Among other things, Los Macheteros took credit for blowing up 11 fighter jets at a National Guard air base and killing two sailors during an attack on a U.S. Navy bus. Both events took place in Puerto Rico.

Thursday, Gonzalez, a thin, ascetic-looking man with a graying beard and long brown hair, was escorted into a small Hartford courtroom in manacles and a bright orange prison jump suit. During the brief proceeding, he listened intently to a Spanish translator and quietly answered "not guilty" when asked for his plea to the charges.

He was one of more than a dozen Puerto Rico nationalists indicted in the spectacular 1983 robbery, which was carried out with the support of the government of Cuba. Los Macheteros recruited a young man from Hartford, Victor Gerena, to obtain employment at Wells Fargo and act as inside man during the robbery.

Afterward, the group moved Gerena and the cash to Mexico City hidden behind false walls in a motor home. A former Cuban diplomat has said Gerena later was flown to Cuba after Cuban agents disguised him and provided him with a fraudulent Argentine passport. More than $2 million of the stolen cash went to Cuba with Gerena, according to the U.S. government and a former Cuban government source.

Gerena is one of about 90 U.S. fugitives believed to have been granted asylum by former Cuban President Fidel Castro.

With Gonzalez's capture, Gerena and Gonzalez's brother Norberto are the only suspects in the robbery who remain at large. Macheteros founder Filiberto Ojeda Rios died in a shootout with FBI agents in September 2005 at a home where he was hiding in the mountains of western Puerto Rico.

Several sources familiar with the radical independence movement in Puerto Rico have said Gonzalez held a senior position in Los Macheteros at the time of the robbery, an operation the group had code-named Aguila Blanca, or White Eagle. In addition, they said he was one of four Macheteros who drove Gerena to Mexico.

Contact Edmund H. Mahony at emahony@courant.com

Eric McDavid's Hearings Moved .... Again

From:    sacprisonersupport@riseup.net
Date: Thu, February 28, 2008

Dear friends,

Our apologies for not getting this out before today. We know that many of
you are anxious to know what is happening with Eric's new trial motion.
Unfortunately, we found out yesterday that Eric's hearings have been moved
yet again. Due to circumstances beyond anyone's control (the flu doesn't
care about court dates and hearings), the new trial motion hearing has
been pushed back to Thursday, March 6 at 9 am. The sentencing hearing
will more than likely be rescheduled for March 13.

We know how frustrating this is for everyone - especially those of you who
are making an extra effort to be here to support Eric at his sentencing.
Thank you all for sticking with us. Your love and dedication make the
road so much smoother...

Yours,
SPS

Associated Press: Jury gets case of defendant in 2001 University of Wash. arson

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20080228-1918-wst-ecoterrortrial.html

Jury gets case of defendant in 2001 University of Wash. arson
By Gene Johnson
ASSOCIATED PRESS

7:18 p.m. February 28, 2008

TACOMA, Wash. – The three-week trial of a violin teacher charged in a
notorious 2001 fire-bombing at the University of Washington came to a
close Thursday.

Briana Waters, 32, of Oakland, Calif., faces a mandatory minimum of 35
years in prison if convicted of conspiracy, arson, and use and possession
of a destructive device.

The fire, which destroyed the university's Center for Urban Horticulture,
was one of at least 17 fires set by radical activists with the Earth
Liberation Front and the Animal Liberation Front from 1996 to 2001.

Waters maintained her innocence on the stand Wednesday, despite the
testimony of two women convicted in the fire and records suggesting she
obtained a rental car used in the crime. Her lawyer, Robert Bloom,
insisted during closing arguments Thursday that the women, Lacey
Phillabaum and Jennifer Kolar, lied on the witness stand in an attempt to
frame her and win lighter sentences.

First Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Bartlett urged jurors not to buy it.
Phillabaum and Kolar had no reason to identify Waters falsely.

“Her story is ridiculous,” Bartlett said. “It is a grasp at straws by
someone who is unable to take responsibility for her own actions.”

Bartlett portrayed Waters as an environmentally concerned student at The
Evergreen State College in Olympia who became convinced that “direct
action” was the best way to protect the Earth and change corporate
behavior. In 1998, The New York Times Magazine quoted her, then a senior,
as saying she supported politically motivated arsons as long as no one
gets hurt.

She was a close friend of William Rodgers, a leader of the arsonist cell
who committed suicide after being arrested in the UW fire. Prosecutors say
her boyfriend at the time, Justin Solondz, worked at a “clean room” behind
her Olympia home to fashion the incendiary bombs from timers, Tupperware
containers and bladders of gasoline.

Waters first came to the attention of investigators in early 2006, when
Kolar said she had found documents at her home with Waters' name and
remembered that Waters served as a lookout during the arson. In earlier
FBI interviews, Kolar did not mention her – something Bloom seized on in
arguing that Kolar was lying.

But Phillabaum also identified Waters, saying she had obtained the rental
car through a relative, so it would not be traceable. Records from Budget
Rental Car in Olympia later corroborated that: The wife of Waters' cousin
rented a car the weekend of the arson, and the cousin himself testified
that Waters borrowed it, bringing it back with 237 miles used – more than
enough to get to and from Seattle.

Just before the fire the night of May 20, 2001, Solondz withdrew $200 from
an ATM, his bank records showed. On May 29, Waters' cousin deposited $200
cash into his bank account – money to reimburse him for the car rental,
prosecutors said.

Bloom made much of records from a Ralph's Thriftway grocery store in
Olympia that showed Waters made a $13 purchase at 7:12 p.m. the night of
the arson.

“Briana Waters could not have been with them. She was at Ralph's Thriftway
at 12 minutes after 7 on that Sunday night,” Bloom insisted.

But Bartlett and Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Friedman argued that
leaving Olympia at 7:12 gave Waters plenty of time to meet up with other
conspirators at Seattle's Greenlake Bar and Grill between 8 and 9 p.m., as
Kolar and Phillabaum testified.

From there, the group went to the horticulture center – targeting it
because they mistakenly believed researchers there were genetically
engineering poplar trees. As Kolar, Solondz and Rodgers broke in and
planted two fire bombs, Waters crouched in nearby bushes with a radio, the
witnesses said.

Simultaneously, another group of activists was setting fire to a poplar
farm in Clatskanie, Ore.

In all, more than a dozen people were arrested in connection with the
arsons around the West. Waters was the only one who went to trial rather
than plead guilty.

The university rebuilt the horticulture center at a cost of $7 million.

Jurors were expected to begin deliberating Friday morning.

Portland, OR: March 9th event about the San Francisco 8

KBOO Community Radio and Circle A Radio present an afternoon of
information about the San Francisco 8.

Murder Charges Against Former Black Panthers Based on Confessions
Extracted by Torture

On January 23rd, 2007, eight former Black Panthers were arrested on
charges related to the 1971 killing of a San Francisco police officer. The
original charges were thrown out after it was revealed that police used
torture to extract confessions. Now, over thirty-five years after the
initial charges were made, and with no new evidence, they are being
re-tried.

Hank Jones, one of the SF 8, will be in Portland to discuss the case. He
will be joined by Claude Marks and Maisha Quint of the Committee to Free
the Eight, as well as Kent Ford, the former leader of the Portland chapter
of the Black Panther Party. This free event will take place at 1pm on
March 9th at Liberty Hall, 311 N. Ivy.

For more information about the event, contact circlearadio@gmail.com.

For more information about the case:
http://www.freethesf8.org/

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Briana Waters Trial: Notes from 2/27 PM

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2008/02/372819.shtml

Notes from 2/27 of Waters Trial: Briana Waters testimony
Court reconvenes after lunch break. Briana Waters takes stand. Defense
Atty. Bloom examines.
Disclaimer: Since this testimony was recorded through handwritten notes
and the actual spoken testimony went faster than some notes could be
transcribed, some questions and answers may appear incomplete. However,
the bulk of the testimony appears as it was said in court.
Defense= D
Briana Waters = B

D- I forgot to ask about the facilities at The Evergreen State College...
are there soundproof recording studios there?
B- Yes. I'm assuming they are soundproof; I've recorded in them before. D-
Did you live with a cousin, Robert Corina in summer of 2000?
B- Yes
D- Did you babysit during this period?
B- Yes
D- Re: testimony of rental car, do you have memory of rental car?
B- Yes, he asked me if I would move some of my stuff.
D- Did you give Corina money before you left for California?
B- Yes I wanted to contribute $100 for bills and other things.
D- Remembering Watch Mountain, did you have any dealing with law during
that campaign?
B- Yes, the Forest Service- we obtained an extended stay permit to stay
beyond two weeks.
D- Did they renew it?
B- Yes, they renewed it as many times was we needed it to.
D- Did people of Randle come out at any time to treesit? Please explain to
a jury what a tree sit is.
B- (Explains tree sit)
D- Purpose of tree sit?
B-To stop logging of a particular area, and to hopefully obtain media
attention.
D- Mark Exhibit for Identification, please. A 2114 Permits from Watch
Mountain. What is this?
B- A flier for a picnic, another permit, same photos from tree sit, a
picture of me on traverse lines, a woman from Randle climbing a tree. D-
(Shows photos) All together how much time did you spend with Watch
Mountain campaign?
B- I guess it was a little under a year.
D- You documented it?
B- Yes
D- Result of campaign?
B- It was mostly successful, Watch Mountain was taken out of the land
exchange.
D- You heard Mrs. Troxels testimony of bringing people together, can you
tell the jury about this?
B- It was one of the most inspiring experiences of my life. We bridged
gaps between environmentalists and loggers. For me it was a great example
of the way things should be done.
D- Did it make you want to commit arson?
B- No- it had the opposite effect.
D- Remember meeting Bill Rodgers?
B- On campus, maybe at an early meeting for Watch or at the Steel workers
Union action.
D- Do you remember what the Steel workers action was?
B- To block shipment of ore to promote the publicity of the treatment of
the Steel workers and the cutting of trees was done by one corporation:
Maxaam.
D- When?
B- Late 1998, early 1999
D- Did you know Bill Rodgers?
B -Yes, I knew him as Avalon. He seemed nice, he later seemed quite needy.
D- Did he ask you to do him a favor?
B- Yes, he asked me to get him a cell phone since his credit was bad. He
paid his bills to me in advance.
D- Did you know this had anything to do with criminal activity?
B- NO
D- Did you commit any crime with Avalon?
B- No
D- There was a question brought up about your website. Can you explain
your financial condition.
B- We get by. I teach violin to children and adults. I sometimes perform
traditional music. John is a carpenter. He tries his best and we cover the
bills.
D- But not much beyond that? Since the time Agent Halla has come to you
has your situation gotten better or worse?
B -Worse
D- Were you making a living off of financial contributions?
B- No. We had many different fundraisers, loans from the family.
D- This is not a money making scheme?
B- No, unfortunately it's not.
D- Do you recall why you answered the way you did about the mink release
and arson in the NY Times article?
B- I've never agreed with arson... I think it is alienating and not
effective.
D- Do you remember the highlighted articles Ms. Kolar gave to you? B- I
thought it was unfair and wrong to show the articles and attribute them
(the quotes that prosecutor Bartlett read in court) to me. I strongly
disagree with them.
D- Do you want to burn down Disneyland or the Statue of Liberty?
B- (laughing) No.
D- Did you go to the hospital before you moved?
B- Yes I was really sick. It was a gastrointestinal issue. Justin took me
to the ER
D- Did Rob Corina become aware you went to the hospital?
B- Yes
D- This was 7-8m months after May of 2001.
B- Yes
D- Have you been in the Bay area since your move?
B- Yes
D- Did you remember meeting Jen Kolar?
B- Yes... (through social circles)
D- Did you commit arson with her?
B- No
D- Did she give you a gift?
B- Yes, a necklace from Hawai'i. She gave it to me at a Thai restaurant at
dinner.
D- Did she say anything to you?
B- Yes, she told me she felt a connection with me that she's never felt
with any other woman. She felt romantic towards me. I told her I didn't
feel the same way. She was hurt and said she thought I would have a
different response. She was hurt and surprised, like she was used to
getting what she wanted.
D- Did you remember writing a check for Justin?
B- Yes, he was on the east coast.
D- Do you remember a transaction at Ralph's Thriftway in May of 2001? B- No
D- Do you remember how it came about?
B- Mr. Fox showed it to me a few weeks ago.
D- Is Ralph's near Avalon's house on the east side of Olympia?
B -Yes
D- Did you have friends at this part of town?
B- Yes, many friends... I had band practice there and I knew Anthea and
Lawson.
D- Lawson the Assistant Attorney General?
B- Yes
D- Did you hear that a receipt proved you were at Olympia at the time they
are saying you did the UW arson? How did you react to this?
B- Yes, I cried. It gave me a lot of hope.
D- Before Agent Halla came to see you, describe your life.
B- I just had a daughter in January of 2005. I was raising her and
teaching violin.
D- Did that change? Has your life been different?
B-Yes-it's stressful. I don't want to be separated from my child (becomes
emotional)
Defense Rests

Prosecutor Bartlett=P
Cross Examination
P- You indicated several weeks ago you received these records (the Ralph's
Thriftway receipt). But you didn't share these with us did you?
B- No I don't share anything with you. My lawyers do.
P- Let's highlight Exhibit 738, transaction receipts. You say you shop
here a lot. There are your bank records from 2001. Go until you find any
other transactions from Ralph's Thriftway.
B-(Flips through transactions) there are none.
P- During your direct exam, Mr. Bloom Asked many questions related to NY
Times articles. Was this a big deal for you?
B- No I don't remember it happening.
P- (Pulls article up on screen). Ms. Waters, looking at quote, wouldn't
you agree that you were referring to arsons?
B- No I think there could be people who could have gotten hurt in a mink
farm release.
P- I want to ask you about Watch Mountain, actions directed against Plum
Creek in Seattle.
P- In October of 1999. Individual left leaflets warning employees about
further actions could occur. Weren't individuals putting bike locks around
their necks... ?
B- Yes
P- Didn't you go there to harass employees?
B- I think that's a fair description.
P- Were people arrested? Were employees yelled at and confronted?
B- Yes
P- During this confrontation, people said that whatever it takes, we will
stop this.
B- Yes
P- What does this mean?
B- That we would pursue any avenue we could to get the timber sale
dropped. P- This wasn't the only time you've had and opinion of how
serious UW arson was? Exhibit1101, Recognize this written as your
attorneys and you. B- Yes
P-(Reads description of UW arson from pleading document)- where it was
described as an act which did not hurt anyone. A misguided attempt... B-
Yes but my lawyers wrote this not me. These are not my words.
P- Isn't it that you change your position for the jury?
B- No this is not true.
P- Do you remember the testimony of Ms. Linn?
B- Yes
P- Please look at the supportbriana.org website. One of the things they
ask for is a support in the court room. They are organized, no?
B- I don't know
P Regarding your website, do you know that your website give instructions
for how to dress and act in court, asking people to wear "court
camouflage"?
B- Maybe, I don't know... haven't seen website in a while
D- What is a primary source of income on a month to month basis?
B- My partner's carpentry work.
P- Let me ask you about Bill Rodgers, were you met?
B- We met before Watch Mountain Campaign
P- Close friends? Part of Watch?
B- Just friends, remember seeing him at meetings, but not at treesit. P-
Sometime in 2000 Bill Rodgers asked you to get him a cell phone. You were
poor at the time, didn't even have a cell phone yourself.
B- Yes for whatever reason, he asked me.
P- (Pulls up bill for $91) So in addition to you paying the bill, he uses
this phone to call you a fair amount. (Pulls up phone records from Ocean's
house, Teresa Howell's house). Isn't it fair to say that most of these
calls are for you?
B- No- some were for me, but I wasn't the only person living at those
houses. P- Did you have occasion to talk to him about his environmental
views? B- Mostly we talked about his loneliness... I was mainly a support
person for him (his depression).
P- Didn't you know he was obsessed with direct environmental action? B-
that wasn't what we mainly talked about.
P- In addition to Mr. Rodgers you knew Justin Solondz, your boyfriend.
There was a time he changed his appearance. (Shows pictures of Justin S.
with long hair and goatee, then later with short hair and full beard). B-
Correct.
P- You knew he was a fugitive, no?
Objection- Defense: He was not a fugitive b/c he had not been arrested.
Overruled
P- you knew Nathan Block? Ms Savoie? Mr Dibee, Ms, Zacher, Mr. Rodgers..
Shows pictures. Joe Dibee called your house twice, right before and after
the Susanville action.
B- I don't know
P- Ms. Kolar was your friend.
B- Yes
P- In fact you invited her to a screening of "Watch" in Seattle?
B- Possibly, I don't remember
P- Please give Ms Waters Exhibit #___: the folder given to Jen Kolar with
the articles in it. You provided a number of articles to Ms. Kolar? B-
Apparently, I don't remember giving her these articles. We mainly talked
about issues of women in activism, vegetarianism, so I would think that
the articles I gave her would be about that, not these articles here. P-
Ms. Kolar at some point became attracted to you.
B- Yes
P- Could you point out all of the phone calls and emails that Ms. Kolar
sent to you during this time she was supposedly obsessed with you. B- I
didn't say obsessed. I just said attracted.
P-Are you saying that Ms. Kolar was so full of venom after you turned her
down that she is framing you? You were saying that Lacey Phillabaum was
testifying against you b/c you called her an unprincipled slut?
B- I don't know why she's doing this. I'm not inside their heads.
P- Mr. Corina was your cousin. You were close, you stayed with them. There
was never a huge blow up where he indicated hatred of you?
B On Feb 21st Lacey Phillabaum indicated you were the lookout and you had
gotten a rental car . Mr Corina has car records for you the same weekend
of the arson.
B- That's what the records indicate.
P- Do you expect the jury to believe that this is a coincidence?

Afternoon Break
P- Ms. Waters I want to go back to exhibit___: the call that Mr. Rodgers
made to Ocean's house. Look at exhibit ___: calls from Bill Rodgers phone
at various locations. Do you see the call made to Conger St. June 3rd one
week after the arson... and there are a number of calls over the summer up
to September 13th, at which point you moved out.
B- There were a number of people living there, but sure.
P- Can you look through the manila envelope and see if any of the articles
you sent or gave to Ms. Kolar? Is it your testimony you didn't give her
these things?
B- It is possible that Justin gave me some articles to give to her. I
remember talking to her about different things so I don't remember. P- So
she switched the documents?
Objection Defense: Speculation- overruled.
B-I don't know, I can't say.
P- Why did Jen Kolar name you?
B- I don't know, I'm not inside her head. She was probably very scared of
life in prison.
P- So they're lying? And the rental records are a coincidence? And these
are not your articles? And you never took the wireless headset?
B- I don't know, it may be a coincidence. These are not my articles and I
may have taken t he headset when I went to the hospital in January of
2002.

Question from defense
D- Did you always use your charge card when you shopped?
B- Sometimes, but I tried not to, because sometimes they charge you when
you use your card, so I tried to use cash.
D- Were you upset when you found out Mr. Rodgers died?
B- Yes, it was sad. He was very depressed... he was obsessed with not
having a girlfriend.
D- And Anthea and Lawson lived near Ralph's.
B- Yes, and other band members.
D- I noticed when Mr. Bartlett asked you about your records he never asked
you if you were at Ralph's Thriftway that night.
B- No he didn't
D- I offer a segment of "Watch".
Judge denied- "same ruling"
D- Judge- he (Prosecutor Bartlett) opened the door...
Judge- Same ruling.
D- I offer the rest of the paragraph from the pleading document that the
Prosecution read from.
Prosecution objects-jury steps out.
Judge grants only a one sentence completion.
D- Mr Bartlett reads a pleading that omitted words. Let me read the rest
of that sentence. "35 years to life for an act that did not hurt anyone...
is outside of the pale." Did you participate or preapprove any wording of
this document?
B- No I didn't... any time I spend outside of court I am with my
daughter... my lawyers write all of that.
D- Do you feel this arson is a minor petty crime?
B- No I feel that it is unspeakably terrible for those affected.
D- Ms. Kolar was involved in four arsons...
Prosecution objects
D- There was a statement made about orchestrating the people in the
stands, are you doing this?
P- No I'd be amazed if I had the time
D- Mr. Bartlett showed 2 exhibits of 55 phone calls from the year 2001
from Mr. Rogers. About one a week, does this seem like a lot from a lonely
guy?
B- No
D- of the thousands of documents seized in Mr Rodgers home, there was only
one mention of you and that was in the scope of the Watch Mountain video..
B- Yes
D- Mrs. Solondz, Justin's mother was here. Were you surprised to see her?
B- Somewhat b/c she lives on the east coast. I think New Jersey.
D- Did Justin tell you he was leaving the country?
B- I believe so October of 2005.
D- Do you recall the phone calls from Mr. Dibee for one minute each? B- No
D- About these articles, you heard testimony that on the 80 (pages of?)
articles that Ms. Kolar said were from you, your finger prints didn't
appear on any articles.
B- Yes I heard this
D- So you don't know if Ms. Kolar put inflammatory articles...
Objection- Prosecution
D- Exhibit___-- email from Jen Kolar to a friend on how she was interested
in a particular woman. I'm reading from toward the bottom. " So I'm not
going out with anyone... proud of me? Joe is becoming a better
ex-boyfriend than a boyfriend... I became obsessed with this particular
woman, Jessica... I'm planning on going to see her, if I have the guts to
ask her out." Did you see this?
B-Yes
D- After Agent Halla came to your home in Berkley did you call friends and
family?
B- Yes I told them they might be contacted, especially if I lived with
them D- Did you ask Mr. Corina to lie? Deny knowing you?
B- No I didn't do any of that. I told them to tell the truth. I'm
innocent. B -Lacey Phillabaum said you were going to rent a car for you-
an older woman or or an aunt. Is Cara Larson older?
B- No, she's younger than me, I think.
D- Mr. Bartlett said that Lacey Phillabaum and Jen Kolar came in
independently, did there come a time during the testimony that Agent Halla
had given factual information to Cara Larson at her work when he said the
car she rented may have been used in an arson?
D -There was a question of Ralph's Thriftway. Did Bill Rodgers live near
there?
B -Yes
D -Why did the prosecution not ask you about a phone call on 5/20/01 at
7:25 to Bill Rodgers?
Prosecution- Objection
D- Why would you lie?
Prosecution Objects
D- On that weekend was your stuff moved to Ocean's from Kara's?
B- Rob,my cousin, asked me to move stuff on 5/20 weekend.
Prosecution- Objection
D- Were there boxes put in your garage?
B- Yes
D- Do you recall Justin moving boxes into your garage that weekend? B- I
have a vague memory- it wasn't a big event or anything.
D- Justin's car was not available that weekend so Justin used the rental
car to move your boxes.
Prosecution- Objection.
Defense- no further questions.

Prosecution reexamines
P- Phone call to Mr. Corina to tell the truth. On Feb 26 Agent Halla came
to your house. How long was he there for? 15-20 minutes?
B- About fifteen minutes, I'd say that's right.
P-Was it a couple of weeks that you went to another lawyer then retained
Mr. Bloom. After retaining Mr. Bloom did you call and tell Mr. Corina (the
cousin) that you were innocent?
B- Yes, as I recall

Defense reexamines
D- Did you tell the truth?
B- Yes I did.
D- Any doubt?
B- No
Defense Rests

Briana Waters Trial: Notes from 2/27 AM

Briana Waters (BW) trial 2/27/08
(this is a summary and is not meant to be an actual verbatim transcript)

Defense’s (D) case

exhibit (x) 897 Photo of BW shown to Stan Meyerhoff

D calls Ju-Pong Lin
BW’s teacher at Evergreen (E), taught women’s studies and film
BW took film and video classes and independent studies from her

BW more memorable than other students, in indie studies she was a hard
worker, ethical sophisticated
made video about unsustainable logging on the Gifford-Pinchot NF, it was
about building alliance between loggers and Earth First!ers

Lin went to BW’s website, sent for copy of video, never got it, later sent
letter informer her that heir were tech problems with website, not updated

x1122 3-part student contract and eval: 1. Student contract, 2. teacher
eval, 3. student self-eval

BW did not complete video before graduation because she was involved with
WTO protest, Common to not complete projects, but she did meet her goals.
Had no doubt project would be completed.

D: was she forced to write the eval?
A: No

Witness excused

D (Bob Bloom) calls Dale Mann, forensic scientist with MDE Inc of Seattle,
degree in chemistry and oceanography. worked for law enforcement agencies
for 17 years including crime labs, left in 98.

He read court-issued order about not describing difference between
incendiary device and bomb. Incendiary “bomb” needs to explode.

Took special classes about drugs, fires, bombs, plastics and impression
evidence (the study of the impression one object leaves on another when
they contact)

D: Did he work with fire cases?
A: Primary interest in fire debris analysis, for a while was the only
expert of that in western WA

took trainings from FBI, BATF, also taught to both agencies
Published reports, serves on national fire investigation committee that
reviews published papers

TWIGFEX produces reports
X A180 is TWIGFEX glossary of terms

Prosecution (P) objects since he is not familiar with this glossary, jury
sent out, overruled

Jury back in

D: is an explosive defined?
A: Y

D: is bomb defined?
A: Y

D: is a delay device defined?
A: Y

D: do you agree with these definitions?
A: Y

D: how many destructive devices has he seen?
A: half a dozen, some very common

D: is gasoline an accelerant?
A: Y, anything used to help materials burn is an accelerant, gas is well
studied, lots of literature on it.

D: Define heat capacity
A: the energy released when burned. There are standards at which certain
substances are known to burn

D: define heat release rate
A: how fast an object release energy when burned

DM: flame height relates directly to diameter of exposed area

D: define ignition energy
A: energy require to light something on fire

D: define flash fire
A: lots of vapors consumed rapidly

Discussion of controlled burns such as those used in forest fire fighting
DM: have conducted many controlled burns, from small ones to burning
entire shopping malls

DM: combustion vs. explosion, combustion has a slower rate or reaction,
explosion releases a shock wave, the rate/speed of energy release is much
faster

DM met with Fox (defense attorney) and was given FBI, BATF and Seattle FD
reports on the west coast fires and the ALF/ELF manual

D: where did he first see the use of the term “bomb” as related to this
case? A: in those reports, BATF 1st used term “bomb.” Bomb is any
explosion that causes shock waves.

D: ALF/ELF manual includes instructions on how to construct and
manufacture delay devices?
A: Y

D: How to build them/
A: Y

D: types of fuel to use?
A: Y

D: does it include a description of the intent of the devices?
A: Y, controlled burns, how the delay device starts the igniter devices,
ignites the matches, which ignites the flare, which ignites the fuel load,
a 5-gallon bucket which would control the evaporation and produce a small
localized fire.

D: was this designed to explode?
A: N

DM: clock used to delay, ignition component, sequence model rocket
igniter, lights matches, which lights the flare. Gas used as accelerant.
In UW fire, 2-gallon containers were used, fuel confined. Containers used
to localize the fire. Confinement makes the fire burn longer. A sofa used
as fuel would work as well as gas. It is all a matter of plotting the
curve of energy vs. time. Tests have shown that a cigarette used to start
a sofa on fire can burn a room in 5 minutes.

D; Can a sofa explode?
A: N

D: Describe a Molotov cocktail
A: A glass bottle with gasoline and a rag stuck in the top. The rag is the
wick. The wick is lit and then the bottle is thrown. The glass has to
break for it to work.

D: destructive devices come in 3 categories: explosive, incendiary and
poison gas
P OBJECTS: explosive bomb, incendiary bomb, poison bomb? There actually
are 18 categories, not 6, not 2. It is all irrelevant cine he does is not
too familiar with the document.

COURT TAKES MORNING RECESS

D: The statute defines destructive devices. Was the UW device intended to
explode?
A: N

D: Did the BATF describe the UW device as an incendiary bomb?
A: N, a destructive device was used in combination with incendiary fuel
ignited with a timed device. The UW device was a destructive device. A
cigarette and a sofa could be considered a destructive device

D: does he have an opinion on whether the UW device was an incendiary bomb?

P OBJECTS

D: Has he heard of Thomas Keller, a high-profile arsonist?
A: Yes, he likes to sue Bic lighters and just about anything to start fires.

P OBJECTS

DM: UW device produce a localized and lengthened fire where as a Molotov
would produce a rapidly spreading fire

P: NO QUESTIONS

Witness excused

AT AROUND 11 AM BRIANA WATERS TAKES THE STAND

She is asked about her age, her partner, daughter, family, siblings,
parents, ½ brother, mom (in court), high school. Started playing music at
age 5 or 6, violin, went to college in Dayton, OH for 2 years. Quit
because she could not afford it. Traveled the country looking for a new
school. Transferred to E in 97.

D: Has she testified before today?
A: N

D: Is she nervous?
A: Y

D: Did she make friends at E?
A: Y

D: Did she join any student groups?
A: Evergreen Animal Rights Network (EARN), Environmental Resource Center
(ERC), music groups.

D: What is her interest in the environment?
A: The same as she hopes everyone’s is, the ability to live sustainably on
the planet

She met fellow student Justin Solonz (JS) in 99, months later they
developed a relationship

She first went to Watch Mtn. (WM) in spring of 99, the ERC was involved
with WM. there was much dialogue with the community before the first tree
sit went up. She defined a tree sit as a platform high up in the trees
used to stop logging under the premise that the loggers would not cut the
tree with someone in it.

D: Did she go to WM as an activist or a videographer?
A: She can’t separate. That is what she does; she takes pictures and
documents. She can’t separate documenting and activism in her mind.

In the summer of 99 she started WM project. She went to different groups
and interviewed people. Lots of groups involved, including the people of
Randall, WA. She learned that Plum Creek (PC) only clearcuts. She took a
tour with a PC employee who said that WM was “designed to be clearcut.”
She said that she took 50-100 hours of footage.

She graduated form E in 99, but the documentary project continued

D: Did she hear Lacey Phillabaum’s (LP) and Jen Kolar’s (JK) testimony
that she was involved with the UW arson?
A: Y

D: Was she involved?
A: Absolutely not

Agent Halla came to her home in Berkeley, CA, on 2-24-06 with another
agent. They gave her info about the UW arson, said she was involved, told
her to speak to Friedman (prosecutor) to get a public defender. She called
him that day. He gave her the number of Peter Avenia, who she also called
that day.

D: Did she learn from the agents that they were interested in the May
20/21, 2001, arson at UW 4.5 years after the incident?
A: Y

D: Is that what reminded her of the time period?
A: Y

D: Does she have a diary of that time?
A: N

D: Did she commit a crime back then that helped remind her of that time? A: N

D: Did she try to think of some incidents to help her remember that time?
A: Y

D: Which?
A: She completed the Watch film and showed it at E in April

D: So you are not able to sue the crime as a reference point?
A: N

D: Were there other screenings of the film?
A: Capitol Theater on 5/01, Seattle in summer of 01. It was shown around
he country, shown at other colleges, shown in SF in 10/01.

D: Has she committed any arsons ever?
A: N

D: Did she ever conspire to commit arsons?
A: N

D: Does she think arsons are okay?
A: No, she never thought arsons were okay.

D: Does she remember persons speaking on campus?
A: Y

D: Describe EARN.
A: a campus org that held potlucks, brought speakers to campus, held bake
sales with tabling literature on the table

D: Were these underground activities?
A: No, the opposite

D: EARN invited Craig Rosebraugh (CR) to speak?
A: Yes, she remembers the discussion to bring him to campus because he was
knowledgeable about dissection and vivisection which was a hot topic on E
campus

D: Was CR a controversial person?
A: Yes, because he was the ALF spokesperson

She does not remember much of the speech because she was in charge of
tabling and the bake sale, didn’t hear much of his speech

She has only a vague memory of the NYT reporter at the speech.

D: Does she know his name?
A: N

D: Has she seen his questions?
A: Y

D: Has she seen her answers in print?
A: Y

D: Does she remember her answers?
A: No, does not deny them, just does not remember them

D: Does she support arson?
A: N

D: Never?
A: Never

D: Has she met LP?
A: Y

D: Does she remember Sarah Wald’s testimony about a meeting in Feb. 2001?
A: Yes. She met LP at that meeting. She remembers the meeting because it
was 2 days long, a weekend. There were about 20 people there. It was kind
of a spokescouncil, “where can we go from here?” It was at a barn in
Portland.

D: Did LP have a role there?
A: Yes, she was a facilitator

D: What is a facilitator?
A: Someone who makes sure the meeting runs smoothly, calls on people when
they want to talk

D: were there breakout sessions?
A: Y

D: was LP in her breakout group?
A: Yes. There were about 10-12 people in that group

D: Did she interact with LP there?
A: Y

D: Was JS at the meeting?
A: Y

D: Is there anything she remembers about LP and JS at the meeting? A: Yes,
they were flirting

D: Had JS flirted in the past?
A: Y

D: Did that cause a problem for you?
A: Y

D: was there a Sat. evening event?
A: Just hanging out, played fiddle with others

D: Has she heard of ELAW?
A: Y

D: What is it?
A: environmental law conference

D: Was it public?
A: Y

D: One time or annual event?
A: annual, in Eugene

D: Did she attend in 2001?
A: Yes. I think it is held in March

D: How many people were there?
A: a couple hundred

D: Was LP there?
A: Y

D: LP said she met BW at Denny’s. Did you ever meet her at Denny’s? A: No,
never

D: So that couldn’t have been the first time she met her?
A: N

D: Did she go to the meeting in the soundproof room at E?
A: N

D: Are there soundproof rooms at E?
A: N

BW: You have to be a student to reserve a room at E

D: Did she ever arrange for a room for the meeting?
A: N

D: Are there records of room reservations?
A: Probably

JS told her that LP and him had had a sexual relationship. She was very
angry with both of them It affected their relationship. Her and JS broke
up for a while.

D: Did she ever see LP again?
A: Y

D: After the video was completed, where did she live?
A: Olympia

D: Does she know Ocean?
A: Yes, he is a friend.

D: Did he legally change his name to Ocean?
A: Y

BW: Ocean was in a car accident and then bought a house with the money
from the insurance settlement

D: Did she move in there?
A: Y

D: Where?
A: Into the back structure, a one-room building

D: Was there running water?
A: No, she used the bathroom in the front house. The front house was under
construction to build a wheelchair ramp, widen the doors, remove or raise
counters, add a new bathroom with a shower that could fit a wheelchair.
There were many workers, 6 or 7. She lived there from the end of April
2001 until the fall of 2001. Ocean moved in to the front house in July
2001. He had here live there while the house was under construction so
that there was someone there, someone to water the garden, plus she needed
a place to live. It was a mutually agreeable arrangement.

D: Did Heather ever come by?
A: Y

D: Did she announce her arrival?
A: N

D: So it would have been hard to be clandestine there with Heather and the
workers coming and going?
A: Y

She next saw LP at a party at the Ocean’s house (the same house). It was a
daytime party. By that time she had had the discussion with JS about LP.
She did not want LP at her house. She asked LP to take a walk with her
because she did not want to make a scene. They walked over to a schoolyard
that was near the house.

D: What did they talk about?
A: She told LP that what she did was wrong and that LP had disrespected
her, as a feminist and an activist she thought it was wrong. She did not
want LP at her house.

D: Did she call her a slut?
A: Probably

She then went back to her room to cool down. When she went back to the
front house, LP was gone.

D: LP testified that she was at Ocean’s house and that he lived there. Did
he?
A: N

D: Were there ever-incendiary devices made there (in her room)?
A: N

D: Did she recall plastic sheeting put up there?
A: N

D: Have you ever seen an incendiary device outside of the ones shown to
her in pictures?
A: N

D: Did she ever have one built in her living space?
A: N

D: Has she ever rented a car?
A: N

D: Has her cousin (Robert Corrina) ever rented a car?
A: Y

D: Was RC married?
A: Not then

She moved to Olympia before RC. He called and she told him what Olympia
was like. They (RC and Kara Larson) moved to Olympia. Kara was pregnant.
They moved in with her. Then they moved to Capitol Way. She stayed in
touch with them. She moved to Berkeley in 2002. She spoke to them once or
twice per week.

D: Was there ever a period where you were not speaking?
A: Yes. Her housemate/boyfriend Paul used to smoke in the house. RC had a
problem with him smoking in the same room as pregnant Kara. BW agreed but
did not like the fact that RC wanted her to speak to him about it instead
of speaking to him directly. Her, RC and Kara made up at the Capitol
Theater when they ran into each other while attending some random film.
Then they resumed a normal cousin relationship.

D: Can she remember a couple of different car rentals of the Corrina’s?
Were they memorable?
A: No. She does remember requests form RC to move her stuff out of the
house numerous requests.

Jeffrey "Free" Luers Sentence Reduced to 10 Years

Civil Rights Outreach Committee

For Release: Thursday, Feb. 28, 2008
Lauren Regan, Attorney 541-687-9180

Jeffrey "Free" Luers Sentence Reduced to 10 Years

February 28, 2008 (Eugene, OR)- This morning at 9:00am in Lane County
Circuit Court the re-sentencing hearing for Jeffrey Luers took place in
front of Judge Billings. This followed an Oregon court of appeals ruling
in February 2007 that Luers original sentence of 22 years 8 months by
Judge Lyle Velure was illegal, and the appeals court remanded the case
back to Lane County Circuit Court for re-sentencing. Following the appeals
court decision, negotiations have resulted in the decision today to reduce
Luers sentence to 10 years, bringing his release date to late December
2009.

In June 2001, then 23 year-old Jeffrey "Free" Luers was arrested for the
burning of three trucks at a Eugene car dealership. His stated purpose was
to raise awareness about global warming and the role that SUVs and trucks
play in that process. Despite the fact that this action hurt no one,
caused only $28,000 in damages and the cars were later resold, Luers
received the draconian sentence imposed by Velure.

Luers gained support locally as well as all over the world as a political
prisoner. It is widely believed that Luers received such a drastic
sentence because of the political nature of the action he took. Following
his original sentence, Amnesty International and the Eugene Human Rights
Commission (EHRC) issued letters of support citing that the sentence
appeared to be politically motivated. During the course of his trial,
statements were made by the police and prosecuting attorney that indicated
it was Luers' political views on trial, not merely his actions. His
defense successfully proved that evidence had been tampered with, officers
had lied and that the prosecutor had manipulated evidence to get a legal
search warrant at his residence. Luers was given a sentence that attempted
to send the message to environmental and social justice activists that
even a merely symbolic act of property destruction could be punished more
harshly than many crimes against persons.

Prior to his imprisonment, Luers was a very well respected community
activist in Eugene, Oregon involved with forest defense and cooking free
food for the city's homeless population. He has remained active from
prison, often writing news articles and monthly dispatches to his growing
list of supporters. With a release date on the horizon, Luers future is
bright and he plans to pursue courses and looks forward to sharing quality
time with his family and loved ones.

Statement from Jeffrey Luers:
"Today I feel a great weight lifted off of me, and my loved ones. While I
believe my new sentence is still more of a reflection of my activism and
my dissent than my actual crimes; I am looking forward to my much closer
release date.
I am proud of the many things I have accomplished while incarcerated,
including reaching beyond oceans and borders to help raise awareness about
global warming and to help combat social injustice.

I am thankful of my family, friends and the thousands of supporters and
fellow activists from around the world who have stood by me since day one.
And I'd especially like to thank my attorneys, and friends. Lauren Regan,
Misha Dunlap and Shawn Wiley for never giving up on getting me out sooner
than 22 years.
I am happy to say this journey is almost over and I'll be coming home soon."

For more information, go to www.cldc.org and www.freejeffluers.org.

Jeff Luers statement to the court


Jeffrey (Free) Luers Resentencing Hearing, Feb. 28, 2008
Eugene, OR

Lane County Circuit Court Sentencing Hearing in front of
Judge J.A. Billings Present: Defendant Jeffrey Luers,
Attorneys Lauren Regan, Jess Barton and Hugh Duvall on
behalf of Mr. Luers; Assistant District Attorney Erik
Hasselman on behalf of the State of Oregon.

Statement of Jeffrey Luers to Judge Billings at Sentencing

It has been many years since I first stood in court to be
sentenced for these actions. I now not only have the
benefit of hindsight but also possess the knowledge and
understanding that comes from leaving the naiveté of youth
behind.

I can now say with all honesty that I was wrong to think
that arson would inspire social change. But, my failure
in understanding that does not mean I have changed my
opinion of radical activism.

Mr. Hassleman has a written statement from me in which I
have acknowledged being wrong. I have also committed to
living the life of a law-abiding citizen and promoting my
activism through legal means and channels.
Understandably, the prosecutor has expressed some
skepticism of my sincerity. I wish to lay those fears to
rest.

I am truly excited about my future. Through the love and
support of my family, friends and many people I do not
even know, I have numerous options available to me. I am
looking forward to furthering my education, and pursuing
my goals through hard work. I am ready to share my life
with my loved ones and I am dedicated to giving back to
the community that has shown me so much love and support
through these years of imprisonment. That is not the lip
service the prosecutor may fear, but my sincere desire to
move on with my life.

However, choosing to take a new path and recognizing my
mistakes and failures does not make me ashamed of them. I
am sorry if my actions instilled fear or the sense of
victimization in the Romania family. That was never my
intent.

I sought to promote change through radical struggle. I
viewed the refusal of our government and corporate
institutions to address the issues and dire consequences
of global warming as legitimate reasons for direct action.
I still believe that government and corporate inaction is
a legitimate reason for direct action. Yet, I recognize
that militant struggle has failed to create widespread
social change for many reasons. And I’m not sure if it is
even capable of creating the change we desperately need.

We are witnessing a mass extinction event taking place in
our life times. The world’s top scientists are warning
that by the middle of this century, 30 to 50 percent of
all living species could be extinct. There are
predictions of 250 million people, or more, dying for lack
of water and food. Fears that melting glaciers in Alaska
and Greenland could catastrophically raise global sea
levels. While here at home our leading climate scientists
have been censored by our government. Their reports
edited by Bush appointees who now work for some of
Americas biggest oil companies. We have been deceived by
the very people responsible for our well-being.

Fortunately, the veil has been lifted and many Americans
are now demanding that action be taken on climate change
and other environmental issues. Indeed many states are
now confronting our federal government on the topic.
However, so far all legislative attempts to solve the
problem have failed or have lacked the necessary backbone
to accomplish anything meaningful. The time for change
has to be now. We no longer have the luxury of passing
our problems off to the next generation. We must be
vigilant in our determination to create change and find
solutions to what is arguably the greatest threat humanity
has ever faced. It is the people in this courtroom, the
citizens of this country, this state and this country that
must carry the responsibility for creating change. For if
we can’t change our own lives how can we expect others to
change theirs?

I’m ready and willing to change so that I can help find
real solutions to our problems. I’m ready to help find
methods that aren’t limited to rhetoric. Doomed to
failure by symbolism or rendered meaningless by
corruption. I choose to take a new direction because not
only is a new path sorely needed in my own life, but a new
direction is sorely needed by our country. I recognize
that if I’m not helping to create that change, I’m just
standing in the way. We are all in this together whether
we are labeled radical, conservative or liberal. And
together is the only way we are going to solve this
problem.

It is easy for me to say these things. I doubt that my
commitment to the environment or social change has ever
been questioned. However, I am sure the court as well as
many others, question whether or not I have truly left my
militant past behind. To which all I can say is that I
am ready to live my life. I’m ready to put the needs of
my family first. And I’m also ready to find success
where thus far radical struggle has failed. More than
anything, I am just ready to move on.”


To which Judge J.A. Billings responded that he has been a
lawyer and a judge for 35 years and he has never received
a statement from a defendant of such high quality. “I’m
very impressed with you. I have no hesitation in
accepting this sentence. I wish you only the best.”

-------------------

2/28/08 Statement of Jeffrey Luers After Sentencing Hearing

Today I feel a great weight lifted off of me, and my loved
ones. While I believe my new sentence is still more of a
reflection of my activism and my dissent than my actual
crimes; I am looking forward to my much closer release
date.

I continue to stand by my actions and have no regrets
about my choices. These last several years in prison have
not deterred me from speaking my mind, following my heart
or standing up against oppression and injustice.

I am proud of the many things I have accomplished while
incarcerated, including reaching beyond oceans and borders
to help raise awareness about global warming and to help
combat social injustice.

I am thankful to my family, friends and the thousands of
supporters and fellow activists from around the world who
have stood by me since day one. And I’d especially like to
thank my attorneys, and friends. Lauren Regan, Misha
Dunlap and Shawn Wiley for never giving up on getting me
out sooner than 22 years.

I am happy to say this journey is almost over and I’ll be
coming home soon.




--
Friends of Jeffrey Free Luers
www.freefreenow.org

Jeff's listserve:
http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/freejeffluers

Donate to Jeff's Legal Defense Fund
http://tinyurl.com/2uykh

How to Help:
http://freefreenow.org/howtohelp.html

Mixed news

Urgent ELP! Bulletin (28th of February 2008)

Dear friends

ELP has three lots of news for you today:

1) New Canadian Animal Rights Prisoner
2) Antifa prisoner Maksim Gubskiy has been released
3) Update on American prisoners Laura and Kevin

1) ELP has just learnt that the Canadian animal rights activist, Gabriel Villeneuve, has been arrested & remanded accused of breaching probation conditions by allegedly attending a protest (he was not at the protest!). The exact charges against him are as yet unknown but please send letters of support to:

Gabriel Villeneuve #HUL03299801
500, de la Faune
Case Postale 87130
Québec, Québec
G1G 5E4
CANADA

Please Note: Gabriel is not allowed to receive anything other than letters and pictures. If you would like to e-mail a message of support, please send your e-mail to shaccanada@riseup.net The e-mails will be printed onto paper and then sent onto him. (Please remember no prisoner has access to e-mail, so if you'd like a reply please include your postal address!)

2) Yesterday, 27th of February 2008, Belarussian antifa prisoner, Maksim Gubskiy, was released on parole. His co-defendant Vlad Plyashkevich was released three weeks ago. They were jailed after getting into a fight with some Neo-Nazis and following the fight the Neo-Nazis went to the police. In a message the Belarussian anti-fascists want to thank everyone who supported Maksim and Vlad and gave them moral and material support!

3) ELP has just received the following e-mail from supporters of the American prisoners Laura and Kevin......

PLEASE RE-POST!!!

Kevin and Laura had a preliminary hearing on Tuesday, Feb. 26, 2008. The
morning session started at about 9am and they were the last case called
(after 12pm). Before the case was called, there was some discussion
between Laura's PD (public defender) and the DA, and also between Kevin's
PD (public defender) and the DA. When the case was called, Kevin and Laura
came out and were visible to the audience sitting next to each other in
the front. The defense and DA agreed to continue the hearing (meaning to
reschedule it) to a later date, March 13. Both Kevin and Laura looked well
and were allowed to wave at the attendees on their way out. According to
Laura, there is a possible plea pending, but more on that after the next
pretrial hearing on March 13.

I visited Laura today, Wednesday, and she said that she is receiving a lot
of mail and books! In fact she has too many books and has asked people to
stop sending books (she is only allowed three per month!) She thanks
everyone for the support. The last time I spoke with Kevin, he also had
received some mail which was greatly appreciated. He has moved facilities
again, so the contact addresses below should work for whereever he is.

They both have limited ability to call and can call landlines much easier
than cell phones. If you would like a call, put your phone number in the
letter. Also remember to put your address in the letter in case they
aren't given the envelope.

The updated contact info for each: (please misspell Laura's name as shown)

Maura Michlle Lungarlli, booking # 1167062
Century Regional Detention Facility (CRDF)
11705 South Alameda Street
Lynwood, CA 90262, USA

Kevin Olliff, booking #1167029
Terminal Annex
P.O. Box #86164
Los Angeles, CA 90086-0164, USA


+++++++++

Earth Liberation Prisoners Support Network
BM Box 2407
London
WC1N 3XX
England
www.spiritoffreedom.org.uk

Jeff Luers resentencing news

YES! Jeff Luers could be out next year!

Just posted at www.registerguard.com (Eugene daily newspaper):

Arsonist’s sentence cut in half

By Rebecca Taylor

The Register-Guard

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Environmental activist Jeffrey Michael Luers will be released from prison
after serving half of his original 22-year sentence under an a agreement
approved Thursday by Lane County Circuit Judge Jack Billings. With credit
for time served, Luers, 29, could be released in December 2009, or earlier
if he qualifies for a 6-month boot camp program, his attorneys said. The
new sentence comes a year after the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled Luers
was improperly sentenced to back-to-back prison terms for burning three
SUVs at the former Romania truck lot and for trying to set fire to the
Tyree Oil Co. in Eugene in 2000.

Read more in Friday’s Register-Guard.

Jeff Luers resentencing date 2/28/08

Dear Friends,
We can finally share an official resentencing hearing date with you. Jeff's
resentencing will take place Thursday, February 28th at 9am Lane County
Circuit Court in Eugene. Of course we are all very hopeful for a positive
outcome.

An announcement will be sent out on this listserve as soon as possible
with the details. (If you were forwarded this message, you can join the
listserve here: http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/freejeffluers)

Thank you all for your continued support! We are so grateful.

To donate to Jeff's legal debt:
http://freejeffluers.org/donate.html
--
Friends of Jeffrey Free Luers
PO Box 3, Eugene, OR 97440
info@freejeffluers.org
www.freejeffluers.org

To donate to Jeff's legal costs, go to http://www.freefreenow.org/donate.html

Prisoner solidarity in Uruguay

Attack on the Goethe Institute of Montevideo

On the morning of February 27, 2008, there was an attack on the Goethe Institute of Montevideo, an organization connected to the German state, resulting in all of its windows being totally destroyed. This attack represents a show of support and solidarity with the hunger strike that is taking place from February 18 to 29 by insurgent and anarchist prisoners in diverse countries of the world, between Germany, Spain, Switzerland and Argentina.

This hunger strike involves a mobilization against prisons and repression, the isolation regimes, torture and perpetual imprisonment, and for the freedom of all sick prisoners. Those behind this initiative of struggle are the anarchist prisoners Marco Camenish (Switzerland), Rafa Martinez Zea "Jon Bala" (Puerto III, Spain), Joaquin Garces (CP Castellon, Spain), Gabriel Pombo "Musta" and Jose Fernandez (Germany), Petrissans (Argentina) and Thomas Meyer Falk (Germany).

Solidarity with the prisoners in struggle in every part of the world. Down with the walls of the prisons.

http://uruguay.indymedia.org/news/2008/02/65523.php

Two events for the SF8 in Eugene

Legacy of Torture: The War Against The Black Liberation Movement

Eight former Black Panthers were arrested on January 23rd, 2007 in California, New York and Florida on charges related to the 1971 killing of a San Francisco police officer. Similar charges were thrown out back in 1975 after it was determined that the evidence used to indict the men was extracted by police torture. Two of the men have been held as political prisoners for the past thirty years in New York state prisons, but the other six have been living regular lives, working and raising families. These men have become known as the “San Francisco 8”—or SF8. There arrests are part of an ugly history of brutal government repression against civil rights activists. The struggle to gain these men's freedom is growing but it will require much more public support. In a manner similar to the campaign waged in 1971-1972 to free Angela Davis and the ongoing campaign to free Mumia Abu Jamal, this campaign must become widespread and international.
Join us for a showing of the Freedom Archives film Legacy of Torture: The War Against The Black Liberation Movement followed by presentations about the case with filmmaker Claude Marks of the Freedom Archives, Hank Jones of the SF8 (recently released on bail), and Mayisha Quint of the Bay Area Committee to Free the San Francisco 8.
TWO EVENTS!
Wednesday, March 5th, 6:30pm, Room 175, Knight Law Center, University of Oregon
Thursday, March 6th, 3:00pm, Building 17,The Forum, Room 308/309, at Lane Community College

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Briana Waters Trial notes Monday Feb. 25th 9 AM till 2pm

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2008/02/372755.shtml

Briana Waters Trial notes Monday Feb. 25th 9 AM till 2pm
author: secretary
Summary Notes from the morning and a little of the afternoon of Monday.
(not comprehensive)
Tomorrow, (Wednesday) should be a very interesting day. Briana may testify
this afternoon, and all are encouraged to show up to support her. The
trial is drawing to a close, and the next couple days are very important.
Thanks
Yesterday morning began with the finish of the cross examination of
Special Agent Halla by Mr. Fox. Halla confirmed that Jen Kolar had said on
their trip to Olympia that she never remembered Briaana and Lacey
together. He then interpreted this to mean that as he understood it, Kolar
didn't recall Briana and Lacey "being close friends" . Fox brought up that
the tape with which Jen Kolar (JK) had recorded their conversation for her
lawyer could be useful in determining exactly what was said.

Then they talked about the phone number that JK called twice right after
being contacted by FBI agent Quimby. It was determined, through a
stipulation, that the number she called was not "Planet Hemp" During her
testimony, Kolar explained calling "Planet Hemp" because she was going to
buy shoes, (" I was just trying to keep my head together"). In fact, the
Google listing for that number was wrong, and it was shown that in 2005
the number belonged to HLS International Tours, a travel agent.

They talked about Joe Dibee's first mtg with the US Attorney, where they
told him details they thought they knew, in order to show him they were
not bluffing and to elicite his cooperation. After he left his movements
were not tracked.

It was also shown how there was no surveillance on Lacey Phillabaum, no
listening devices or wiretaps to see who she was talking to. Agent Halla
said that wiretaps were not actually used very much, that they were hard
to get.
Was he aware that Stan Meyerhoff and Lacey (LP) talked on the phone after
Stan's arrest on Dec. 7th? Probably, don't know for sure.

Agent Halla's 302 of the Feb. 21st interview of Lacey Phillabaum says that
Lacey said "slept in the bus that night" referring to Saturday night. Also
states that "B.W. and Justin Solondz had just broken up" Agent Halla
cannot or will not remember the context of how she meant "slept in the bus
that night".

Agent Halla went in front of the Grand Jury on march 16th to indict Briana
Waters, but it was never mentioned how JK "remembered" her.
Halla also testified that in the course of this investigation no wiretaps
were used.

There is a forensic lab the FBI operates that can test a car for
metallurgical damage, such as after any minor accident, but Halla said
they had determined that it was not important.

Then they talked about the raid of Justin Solondz's cabin. (in 2007?) An
exhibit photo was shown that showed a variety of anarchist literature
displayed (with Anarchy magazine on top) . Halla admitted that the
literature was arranged for display and photos by the FBI, and had not
been found that way in the cabin. He also acknowledged there was a lot of
other material in the cabin, and Fox offered as evidence a copy of the
Iliad, by Homer, and an article entitled Fate of the Earth by a Dominican
nun.
D: So you took out anarchist materials and showed them to the jury! H: We
showed what we thought was relevant.
D: So you didn't think anything non-Anarchist was relevant.

A group house at 135 Percival St. was brought up, and how it was
investigated that there were calls to that phone both from Madelene
Waters, and also Bill Rogers. Halla explained that they knew the phone was
in the name of Theresa Howell, and there were 4-6 people living there.

Halla testified they had had difficulties finding Briana Waters, but then
Fox called him on it, that she was living under her own name, and had
Halla compare it to Bill Rogers, who was "very difficult to find" and took
a little over a year, compared to 1 month for Briana.

It was determined that in the search of Bill Rogers' home, only one
mention appears anywhere of Briana, and that is a reference in an academic
article to her film.

Finally, they went over the time required to get from Olympia to the
Center for Urban Horticulture, to stash the bags of fuel as LP testified,
and then to drive to the Greenlake Bar and Grill. Determined it could take
2- 2.5 hours. Then Fox brought up Briana's credit card statement, and that
it recorded a purchase at Ralph's Thriftway on the 20th, but with no exact
time given. Halla explained he had tried to get the exact time from
Ralph's through their records, but their system had changed and the data
tape he was given had been corrupt. Fox then produced a register record
that showed a purchase for the same amount at 7:12 pm on the 20th. Halla:
I am a little perturbed I didn't find these records...

Then, the Prosecution rested, and the Defense made a motion to dismiss the
case based on lack of evidence. First, to dismiss the conspiracy count
because the gov't failed to prove any part of the conspiracy alleged, and
second, to dismiss the other charges due to lack of evidence, and also due
to the tainting of the jury. Specifically, exhibits 402 and 612, the
anarchist articles where Bartlett picked out and highlighted sections
presented such prejudice, and their inflammatory nature was so great that
there was no recourse but to dismiss. Of course this judge refused to
consider anything differently once he had ruled on it, and the day moved
into the Defense's first witness, Special Agent Torres from the FBI. Not
much of substance came out before lunch, and his testimony can be found in
the next post.


After lunch, the defense brought 2 witnesses out of turn. First was Haila
Silvertrees, Ocean's mom. She first met Briana when she was staying in
Olympia at a hotel, and Briana offered her room when she was going out of
town for a couple days. She then explained how they bought the house in
beginning of April of 2001, and that it wasn't livable for a long time
while it was being renovated. There was no running water in the back
building. Ocean moved in in the summer of '01, so if someone had seen him
there, it would have to have been in the Summer or later.

Next to be called was Lavern Troxel, a retired airline stewardess who now
lives on a farm in Randle, WA and raises horses.
She tells the jury about the terrible history of Plum Creek Timber in
Randle, with major landslides that trapped the town for a long time. Talks
about Watch Mt. that sits above Randle. How Sierra Club was approached for
land swap between the Forest Service and Plum Creek, and then Slade Gorton
put a rider onto an omnibus bill to speed it along. "We heard nothing of
it in the town, b/c it was legislated and our voices were never heard, but
young people (from TESC) came and told us what was going on." Young people
put up tree platforms, remember: Randle is a logging town and
"treehuggers" are an endangered species. Young people were so respectful
that town did total about face... its almost unheard of for there to be
agreement between treehuggers and townspeople. Logging would have caused
landslide, soil experts testified to this. You had loggers and treehuggers
sitting around the campfire together.. So successful b/c these treehuggers
were so respectful and helpful to town. Briana was filming documentary at
the time. Very diplomatic and helpful... no violence in this thing. Young
people so diplomatic I can't believe that someone like this would do an
about face and do something so out of character. I think I'm a very good
judge of character and it just doesn't follow.
D: What was the outcome?
L: Watch Mt. is still forest service land, we still have our trees.

P (Bartlett): Good morning . Do you recognize this man? (William Rogers)
L: Don't think so.
P: His resume listed himself as a consultant.
L: There were some people who were just passing through...
P: Are you aware that Briana was interviewed by the NYT? By Robert
Sullivan. At the end of a talk w/ Craig Rosebraugh, Ms. Waters was
interviewed (reads portion) in 1998 talk was sponsored by EARN. I asked
members if they support mink releases and arsons, and Briana said "as long
as people don't get hurt"
L: The sentence is unclear whether she is referring to mink releases of
arsons.
P: Isn't it clear that she is referring to arsons.
L: No. Because if someone tried to release my horses, I would try to stop
them and I might get hurt. This is a good sentence for your case, but its
wishy-washy.
P: Does this affect your opinion of BW?
L: No- Theres a big difference between action and talk. I saw BW in action
and her action was above reproach.. We all say things in the spur of the
moment, like people who say "Kill the Umpire!" at a baseball game, but I
don't think they're killers!
P: You said "above reproach"
L:Yes
Gov't exhibit 1102
Defense: What is the P focusing on?
P: I want to point out the "above reproach" . I'll point out something
that might make her reconsider.
From website (supportbriana.org) "100000 pages of discovery" need help, we
have a mountain to climb... this is FRAUD! Her 2 attorneys are appointed
by the court! She's trying to ask for money fraudulently!!
D: I'm quite astonished.
P: It was always A LIE! (shouting)
(jurors come back in)
P:Are you aware that BW has a website?
L: No.
P: Could you look at page 3?
L: yes
P: 3rd paragraph, "BW has found 2 great attorneys... . Mountain to climb"
Do you see these words? Would it change your opinion if you knew that Mr.
Fox was court appointed? Wouldn't you read it as if BW was asking for
help?
L: No, these things cost money... she's a working person and these things
cost money. I think you're grasping at straws.

Seattle Times: Defendant in UW ecoterror trial takes stand, denies involvement

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004247255_apwstecoterrortrial2ndldwritethru.html

Defendant in UW ecoterror trial takes stand, denies involvement

By GENE JOHNSON

AP Legal Affairs Writer

A 32-year-old violin teacher accused of serving as a lookout while her
friends planted a devastating fire bomb at the University of Washington in
2001 took the stand in her own defense Wednesday, telling jurors she had
no part in the crime and never believed in setting fires to make political
statements.

"It's very dangerous to human lives," Briana Waters, of Oakland, Calif.,
testified in U.S. District Court. "I've always been someone who feels very
strongly about not hurting people in any way."

Waters was one of five people indicted in the arson at the university's
Center for Urban Horticulture, and she faces a minimum of 35 years in
prison if convicted of conspiracy, possessing an unregistered destructive
device, arson and use of a destructive device during a crime of violence.

The fire was one of the most notorious in a string of arsons perpetrated
by Eugene, Ore.- and Olympia-based members of the Earth Liberation Front,
a loosely organized collection of radical environmentalists, from the
mid-1990s to 2001. Eventually, more than a dozen people were indicted
following a nine-year investigation into arsons around the West.

No one was hurt in the UW arson, but the center was destroyed and rebuilt
at a cost of $7 million. It was targeted because the ELF activists
mistakenly believed researchers there were genetically engineering poplar
trees.

Two defendants, Lacey Phillabaum and Jennifer Kolar, have pleaded guilty.
They testified against Waters earlier in the trial. The other two alleged
participants were William "Avalon" Rodgers, who committed suicide in jail,
and Waters' then-boyfriend, Justin Solondz, who remains at large.

Phone records, rental car records and testimony indicate Waters was in
contact with at least some of the others around the time of the fire, and
that she obtained a rental car used in the crime.

Waters has been staying in a Tacoma rental home during the trial. Wearing
gold-framed glasses and with her long blond hair pulled back, she
testified in a soft, firm voice, frequently mentioning the young daughter
she will rarely see if convicted.

Waters' lawyers, Neil Fox and Robert Bloom, insist that prosecutors have
overreached by threatening draconian sentences to persuade those charged
in the UW fire and other arsons to plead guilty or testify falsely. Waters
is the only one of more than a dozen activists charged who declined to
plead guilty, instead taking her chances before a jury.

"She was part of a conspiracy in which millions of dollars of damage was
done," U.S. Attorney Jeff Sullivan said after court let out for the day.
"That's why it's a serious crime and has serious penalties."

Bloom suggested that the government's only evidence in the case is the
testimony of Kolar and Phillabaum, who are expected to receive more
lenient sentences in exchange for their cooperation. Waters claimed on the
stand that the two are trying to frame her: Phillabaum because she too had
a relationship with Solondz, and Kolar because Waters spurned her sexual
advances.

Phillabaum and Kolar denied those allegations earlier in the trial, and
while cross examining Waters, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Bartlett
noted that Phillabaum told federal investigators that Waters had obtained
a rental car from a relative for use in the arson.

advertising

The records of Budget Rental Car in Olympia later corroborated
Phillabaum's account: Waters' cousin had rented a vehicle the weekend of
the university fire, and he testified that Waters used it. Soon after, a
$200 cash deposit appeared in his bank account _ the only cash deposit he
made all year, money to reimburse him for the rental car's cost, in the
government's view.

In his questioning, Bartlett suggested that to believe Waters was not
involved, jurors would have to believe that Phillabaum made a "lucky
guess" when she told investigators a story supported by rental car
records.

"I don't know how that would have happened," Waters responded.

Bartlett also pointed to a 1998 New York Times Magazine article about
radical environmentalists which quotes Waters, then a senior at The
Evergreen State University in Olympia, as saying she "totally" supported
arsons "as long as people don't get hurt." Tiffany Tudder, a fellow
student at the time, testified that she remembered Waters making that
statement.

Waters said she could not remember whether she said it or not, but added
that she would be surprised if she did, because she has always opposed
politically motivated arsons.

The defense rested its case Wednesday. Closing arguments were expected by
the end of the week.

Briana Waters Trial – Summary Notes (not comprehensive)

Notes from February 25, beg. approx. 2:00pm, and from all day February 26,
2008

February 25

Defense counsel Bob Bloom opened its case by calling FBI Special Agent
Torres, then took a couple witnesses out of order, then resumed
examination of Torres. (See other note taker’s notes.)

Torres admitted that he did not draft his “302” interview report of his
December 16, 2005 interview with Jen Kolar on the date indicated (Dec.
18), but rather, began drafting it then and did not finish it until
February 9. He testified that the 302 went through a number of drafts
before Agent Halla, who was also present for the interview, prepared the
final 302. The defense maintains that the FBI has faked its 302, and in
fact destroyed the original draft because it would have reflected that
Kolar did not name Briana. Torres and Halla also took handwritten notes
during the interview, but their notes are discrepant. Whereas Torres
specifically recorded in his notes that Kolar listed herself and four
other people, and not Briana (and later reaffirmed that these were the
five people involved), Halla’s notes were much more vague. However, the
typed 302, completed nearly two months later – after the feds had fixed on
Briana as a suspect –falsely states that Kolar named herself, Avalon, “and
few others.” Thus, it appears the agents deliberately injected vagueness
into their 302, in order to try to preserve their false case against
Briana.

Torres bobbed and weaved, trying to claim that Kolar was vague and
uncertain during her interview. However, he acknowledged that in several
places in her notes, he wrote “uncertain” where she indicated she was
uncertain. On the other hand, he had no explanation for why he failed to
write “uncertain” where he was now claiming at trial that she had been
uncertain, such as who participated in the arson. Torres also testified
inconsistently about whether he had any independent memory of the
interviews or not, claiming often that he did not, but then asserting
repeatedly that he remembered Kolar was unsure about certain
identifications. At another point, he testified that his notes “are not a
transcript of the interview [but are] used to aid my memory later.”
However, they seemed to provide no aid to his memory whatsoever, as he
repeatedly gave equivocal answers when pressed for details about the
interview, and testified often that he did not recall.

Later (on February 26), Torres testified that he simply stopped taking
notes during one interview of Lacey Phillabaum, in order to avoid the
confusion which occurred during the Kolar interview. Pressed to say admit
that he was the one confused, not Kolar, he had no good answer. It thus
appeared that he realized his notes might undermine the case the feds were
trying to build, so he simply stopped taking notes. Similarly, Torres
testified that the FBI did not record any of its interviews, per its
regular policy, even though he admitted that a tape recording would have
avoided any confusion about the words actually spoken, and that the FBI
has the ability to record such interviews.

Torres testified that he and Agent Halla reported on other subjects by
consensus in their 302s, rather than reporting what actually occurred.
For instance, he testified that while Kolar described the vehicle used
during the arson as either a car or a van, as recorded in his notes, in
the 302 he and Agent Halla simply reported this as a “vehicle”. (The
government has since tried to make a case that Briana rented a car for use
during the arson, so the fact that Kolar had told them it might have been
a van would not have been helpful to the case they were trying to build;
thus, they simply eliminated this reference in their 302.)

(Needless to say, all of this bodes very ill for the integrity or
reliability of the FBI’s processes.)

February 26

Continuation of Direct Examination of Special Agent Torres:

Torres testified that he participated in a January 12, 2006 interview of
Kolar (but was not present for a January 6 interview). He testified that
she was shown photographs, including of Briana, and identified it as a
photo of Briana, but still did not state that Briana had participated in
the UW arson. Torres hemmed and hawed about whether he would have written
it down if she had said so, but when pressed, he could not articulate any
reason why he would not have done so.

Torres testified that on February 4, 2006, Halla interviewed Kolar on a
car ride from Olympia to Seattle, while Torres drove them, and Halla
showed Kolar more photographs. He showed her a photo of Justin Solondz,
and she said she did not know him. Torres testified that Kolar told the
agents that Briana and Lacey were not close friends (as the agents
reported in the 302 of this interview). However, Torres was forced to
admit that this too distorted what she had actually said, as recorded in
Halla’s handwritten notes: “I don’t remember Briana and Lacey together.”
Torres admitted that if it were true that Kolar had not seen them
together, then Briana could not have been involved in the arson.

Despite his extremely dodgy and evasive testimony, Torres was forced to
admit that Kolar had never once named Briana as a participant, until March
6, 2006, after the FBI had already fixed on her as a suspect.

Torres acknowledged that Kolar had made a tape recording of her car ride
interview with the agents, at her attorney’s behest, but he claimed that
the FBI does not have, and he has never heard, that tape. When asked to
explain why not, he suggested that it might be subject to attorney client
privilege. But he was forced to eat this absurd excuse and admit that
such a recording, not involving a conversation with an attorney, would not
be privileged. When asked if he would obtain a copy for the defense, he
said “that’s not my job.”

Torres testified that Briana had arranged a meeting among the participants
on the Evergreen campus, in a room accessible to the public, and claimed
that this constituted participation in the arson. (He was not questioned
about what the FBI claims was discussed in this meeting, whether it
actually occurred or not, or whether the FBI claims Briana was present.)
Later, a defense witness testified that only present students were
entitled to reserve such rooms, that they would have to identify
themselves and request a key in person, and that records would be kept.

Torres acknowledged that Kolar told the agents she believed Avalon may
have arranged for a rental car for the UW arson. He acknowledged that
Kolar did not say anything to the agents about scraping a parked car while
leaving the scene of the arson, as Phillabaum had testified, and he was
unable to provide any evidence that the Budget car which the government
alleges Briana rented for use during the arson sustained any damage.

Torres testified that he interviewed Lacey Phillabaum, along with Halla,
and prosecutors Friedman and Bartlett, in the presence of Phillabaum’s
attorney, on February 21, 2006. He admitted that while he expected
Phillabaum to make confessions during this interview, the FBI did not
record it, even though the FBI’s regulations provide for such practice.
He testified that in his 11 years, he has never done so. Moreover, he
testified that he simply stopped taking notes in the middle of the
interview (before Phillabaum began admitting her participation in events),
in his words in order to avoid the “confusion” which had resulted from the
discrepancies between his and Halla’s notes from their 12/16/05 interview
of Kolar. Defense counsel suggested that the feds were really just trying
to preserve their ability to manipulate evidence and testimony, and limit
impeachment, and this is the picture that emerged.

Torres testified that Phillabaum informed the feds that Briana and Connor
(i.e. Solondz) had broken up, but could not say whether the feds asked her
this, or whether she volunteered this information. He said Phillabaum
informed them that Chelsea Gerlach was competitive with her related to the
fact that Gerlach had previously been involved with Stan Meyerhoff.

He testified that Phillabaum told them that both Briana and Solondz acted
as lookouts during the UW arson, in contrast with the government’s
allegation that Briana alone acted as a lookout.

He testified that Phillabaum told them while crouching outside the
Horticulture Center, she was concerned about the presence of a bicycle,
and discussed this concern on-scene with Kolar. This highlights a
significant discrepancy in the accounts of the two informants, as Kolar
testified that she did not even see Phillabaum there.

Torres acknowledged that in all the searches of the various defendants’
property, the only thing they found which even referenced Briana was a
footnote in a document referencing her documentary Watch, about the
campaign to prevent clearcutting on Watch Mountain.

On cross examination of SA Torres by AUSA Bartlett, Bartlett had him read
the verbatim “proffer agreement” from the February 21, 2006 interview with
Phillabaum, containing various terms. The purpose of this was unclear.

On cross, Torres also testified that before Kolar named Briana, her
attorney, Mr. Martin, had called AUSA Friedman and told him that his
client, Kolar, now suddenly remembered that Briana was involved in the
arson.

The defense spent the remainder of the day calling a series of witnesses
who know Briana Waters personally, and who testified to her good character
and peaceful nature. These witnesses included an eloquent, native
American man whom she interviewed for her documentary, who said that he
found Briana to be so trustworthy and of such integrity that he introduced
her to several tribal elders, which was a very big deal. He testified
that in extensive discussions, he and Briana agreed that peace could only
be achieved through peaceful means. Two people testified passionately
that Briana baby sat their children, and they trusted her completely with
the lives of their children, and that they also developed good friendships
with Briana. People testified to her skills as a violinist. The gent who
helped her edit Watch testified that they worked extensively together on
the project. A woman from whom Briana sublet a room in Berkeley testified
that she found Briana to be so warm and such a good peacemaker and problem
solver, and that they became close friends. Briana’s Evergreen professor
and supervisor of her independent film project testified that Briana was
among her brightest students of all time, and extremely pleasant to
supervise and work with. Together, these witnesses provided a portrait of
an extremely intelligent, warm, trustworthy, and peace-loving woman, who
was busy with many things, not least working on her film, not planning or
committing an arson, in the time period leading up to it.

The government declined to cross-examine most of these witnesses, but did
fence about Earth First! values with a man who participated in
environmental organizing with Briana. He testified that Earth First! is
not top down, is not a group, and that people interpret for themselves
what it means to organize as an Earth First!er. When questioned whether
Earth First! is radical organization, as it claims in some literature, he
explained again that Earth First! is not a monolith. He then testified
that he considered his and Briana’s tactics radical, but not extreme –
radical in that they were able to unite historically polarized camps, i.e.
environmentalists and timber industry workers, and achieved real success.
Questioned about monkey-wrenching, he said that he and Briana disavowed it
in their campaign.

The woman who owned the house and garage, with her then husband Ocean,
where the government claims the UW arson conspirators created their “clean
room” to assemble the materials used for the arson, testified that she
allowed Briana, her friend, to stay in the garage, free of charge. She
testified that she and Ocean did not move into the house right away, but
rather, began major renovations to make it accessible for Ocean, who is
confined to a wheelchair. She testified that during this construction,
involving, she estimated, 10-15 workers over time, she would visit
regularly, and unannounced, to check on the progress of work. She said
that she never observed anything untoward occurring there while Briana was
living there, and certainly never observed anything that looked like a
clean room. She testified that the garage was full of debris and that
water leaked through the roof, and that the walls were rotting. On cross,
she admitted having informed the prosecutor during an interview that she
rarely visited the garage when she visited, and therefore, would not have
known if Justin Solondz was living there too, but that he was not invited
to live there. On re-direct, she reaffirmed that she did not announce her
visits.

A woman testified that she participated in a two-day meeting with Briana
in Portland, during the first week of February 2001 (probably Feb. 3 and
4), in which she unequivocally remembers that Lacey was also present – in
contradiction to Lacey’s testimony that she first met Briana much later.

Throughout the afternoon, prosecutors objected repeatedly, on fallacious
grounds (most commonly that the questions were argumentative, or that the
questions, or witnesses, were cumulative), interrupting and disrupting the
defense examination. This spawned various hearings outside the presence
of the jury, and a certain amount of tension with the Judge, who often
seemed not to understand exactly what was happening. The Judge would
often repeat the prosecutor’s baseless objections back to the defense. At
times, the colloquies seemed surreal. Defense counsel pleaded for leeway
to put on its case unimpeded, as the government had been allowed to do –
including especially in order to counteract all the character
assassination which the Judge had allowed the government to inject against
Briana earlier in the trial – and made major headway as a result. Court
adjourned with the Judge taking under advisement the defense’s request to
introduce and play for the Jury Ms. Waters’ hour long documentary, Watch.
After never mouthing an objection to the film, throughout the entire case,
and after acquiescing in front of the jury, the government suddenly
reversed itself and objected during the break. The Judge will likely
decide this issue first thing in the morning.

Christian Sümmermann, antifa prisoner, moved

ELP Information Bulletin (27th of February 2008)

Dear friends

ELP has just learnt that the well known German antifa prisoner, Christian Sümmermann, has been moved. His new address is:

Christian Sümmermann
Bnr: 441/08/5
JVA Plötzensee
Lehrterstr. 61
10557 Berlin
Germany

Also ELP has to admit an error in our prisoner lists!!! We reported that German antifa prisoner Andrea Neff is serving 4 months for anti-fascist activity. Andrea is actually serving 14 months imprisonment. Sorry for our mistake. So please do continue to support Andrea by writing to her at:

Andrea Neff, Bnr: 746/07/2,
Justizvollzugsanstalt fur Frauen in Berlin,
Arkonastrasse 56
13189 Berlin
Germany

Many thanks to the Berlin Anarchist Black Cross for this information.

++++++++++++++

Earth Liberation Prisoners Support Network
BM Box 2407
London
WC1N 3XX
England
www.spiritoffreedom.org.uk

Jerome White-Bey Letter Appeal – Enough Is Enough!

The Missouri Prison Labor Union is an anarchist driven prison initiative that was organized by prisoners and supporters in the hope of bettering the living and working conditions in the State of Missouri prison system. One of their goals is to establish minimum wages for prisoners and to stop all prison abuse. They were lawfully given recognition by the Secretary of State in Missouri on August 3rd of 1998. The MPLU is an organization that fights against oppression, repression, torture, brutality, rape, corruption and exploitation of prisoners both male and female. In this struggle they seek to regain their human dignity.

Jerome White-Bey is the founder and president of the MPLU and is now asking for help with a letter campaign. He has been in prison for over 30 years and is scheduled for his next parole hearing in December 2009 and is hoping that if people write to the Governor in support of him it would help his chances of getting a parole date.

A sample letter is below. You can write to Jerome at:

Jerome White-Bey, MDOC#37479,
S.E.C.C., 2B-211,
300 East Pedro Simmons Drive,
Charleston, MO. 63834

All letters in support of Jerome White-Bey being granted parole are to be mailed to:


Mr.Steven Long - Chairman

Division of the Board of Probation and Parole
1511 Christy Dr.
PO Box 267
Jefferson City Mo.65102
USA
Phone number (573) 751-8488

Subject: Parole Jerome White-Bey #37479


Dear Mr Steven Long,


I am writing this letter in support of Jerome White-Bey's application to the Missouri Parole Board to grant him parole in his forthcoming hearing, scheduled for December 2009.

Mr.White-Bey was arrested on June 26 1978 and charged with four counts of First Degree Robbery; Second Degree Murder; and two counts of Armed Criminal Action, which he pleaded guilty to and was subsequently sentenced to a 50 year term of imprisonment. On 10/11/1979 Mr.White-Bey entered Missouri State Prison in Jefferson City. Under previous sentencing guidelines he was initially given a release date of June 2007. However following changes in penal procedures his release date has been put back to 12/25/2015.

I would like to make some points about Mr White-Bey in support of his parole application. His early admission of guilt demonstrates that he took responsibility for his actions and accepted his punishment. He entered prison a young man and over his 30 years of imprisonment Mr White-Bey has matured and developed as a person. His work with the book program and other prisoner support is evidence that Mr White-Bey will be able to adapt to life and make a fruitful contribution to society should he be released. I strongly believe Mr White-Bey is a very different person now to the young man that entered prison in 1978. I ask that you consider the progress he has made and also consider the fact that he has already passed one release date due to changes in sentencing guidelines.



Sincerely

KEXP Radio Interview with Paul Wright on Prison Profiteers on YouTube

This is the video of the interview I did with KEXP radio in Seattle last month about my new book, Prison profiteers: Who Makes Money from Mass Incarceration. They also video taped it and it aired on community access TV in Seattle. It has now been posted on Youtube. It is 30 minutes long.





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b03t_Zc5yVY



If you would like to check out the book, more information and ordering information is available at: https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/104_ProductDetails.aspx

Paul Wright, Editor
Prison Legal News
972 Putney Rd. # 251
Brattleboro, VT 05301
802-257-1342
pwright@prisonlegalnews.org
www.prisonlegalnews.org


Seattle Office:
Prison Legal News
2400 NW 80th St. # 148
Seattle, WA 98117
206-246-1022

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Support Vaggelis Botzatzis

Urgent ELP! Bulletin (26th of February 2008)

Dear friends

ELP has learnt of a new eco-prisoner in Greece.

Vaggelis Botzatzis has been remanded into custody accused of setting fire to two company cars owned by a energy/power company. It is believed that the person or persons unknown who carried out the arson did so in protest at the destruction of the natural environment and in support of two workers who died at the power plant.

Vaggelis is also accused of setting fire to a bank and starting a fire inside a car yard.

Vaggelis denies all the allagations against him and maintains his innocence.

Please send letters of support to:

Vaggelis Botzatzis
Komotini Juridical Prison ("Dikastikes Fylakes Komotinis")
T.K. 69100
GREECE

Vaggelis can receive short messages of support written in English.

When writing to Vaggelis please remember the authorities do censor his mail so please do not write anything that could be regarded by the authorities as "dangerous". Also the exact charges against Vaggelis, due to a lack of evidence, have not been filed. Therefore do not write anything which could influence the setting of charges.

For more information about Vaggelis or the Greek legal system please contact Greek Earth Liberation Prisoners Support! greekelp@yahoo.gr http://greekelp.blogspot.com

+++++++++

Earth Liberation Prisoners Support Network
BM Box 2407
London
WC1N 3XX
England
www.spiritoffreedom.org.uk

Greek eco-prisoner news

From: greekelp@yahoo.gr

A Solidarity March was organised in Thessaloniki, on Vaggelis Botzatzis' case. He is detained in Komotini juridicial prison accused for: burning two power company cars protesting the pillage against the nature, and the workers that died in the workplace, a bank arson against capitalism and in favor of anarchists detained for bank robbery, and an arson at a french brand car yard, that is said to be in solidarity to the youth revolts, but no communique was sent. Vaggelis was arrested in his house on day after the last arson under the "anti"terrorist law, since a security guard claims he recognised his car. Vaggelis doesn't accept the accusations and states he was framed up. Some more info on the march at: http://directactiongr.blogspot.com/2008/02/few-actions-during-solidarity-march.html

if anyone needs any further information on this case, send me an email.

There were also some environmental actions on 24/2 (http://directactiongr.blogspot.com/2008/02/environmental-actions-athens-patras.html)
In spite of some police attention, no one was arrested. Today though, a candidate for the municipal board in Pefkonas, Athens, was attacked by truck drivers, while taking photos of the privatization works against the Pefkonas forest.



Earth Liberation Prisoners Support! - Greece
http://greekelp.blogspot.com

Monday, February 25, 2008

Notes from Briana Waters Trial 2/20

1) AM Session, 2/20
2) PM Session, 2/20

***

A.M. SESSION, 2/20


Wednesday Morning Feb 20, 2008 Briana Waters Vs. USA Robert Corrina
(Briana's cousin) continues testimony & is being cross examined by the
defense. We revist the chronological events between 2006 - Feb 2007, when
he was providing the government with testimony Defense revisits jan 19,
2007 meeting where Friedman and Agent Halla visit Kara (his wife) at her
office. Corrina says he was angry hearing about that meeting, where Agent
Friedman was yelling at her. Defense begins to ask questions regarding
the rental car & the primary use of the car. Who was in the car when the
car arrived back at his house? When was the first memory of the rental?
The defense states that you used the car. You and Kara told the feds that
the principal use of the car was for YOUR Family. The prosecutors
objected, because of hearsay. You, Kara, and your lawyer spoke that Kara
spoke to Friedman. Witness responds, YES. You and Kara swapped notes
about the questions asked to you by the GOVT. He says YES. Kara informed
the government that the car was for the family. He say's he doesn’t know
what Kara told the government in her interview. Kara informed the witness
that she told the government that nobody else used the car. Another
Objection by USA based on hearsay. The judge says hearsay, and that if
the defense wants to call Kara as a witness, they should call her. The
defense begins asking the witness about his car usage, when where, how
long, where did you go? Exhibit shown that has Robert's credit card
transactions for May 19 & 20th, 2001. The defense makes the strong point
after these points that he used the rental car for his purposes Sat.
afternoon. Witness agrees. Defense suggests later on Sat. May 19 Briana
has severe abdominal pains. Witness says that was Sunday. The defense
says that in an interview with MR. Friedman (USA), you stated that Briana
had abdominal pains Sat afternoon. The point is that it was the same day
after your personal car use on Saturday that Ms. Waters had sharp
abdominal pains. And in order to keep yourself and Kara out of jail, you
have to say it was Sunday. The witness denies this, and he says he
wouldn't cooperate but he's telling the truth that it was Sunday. Defense
suggests that Briana didn't return with the car on Saturday night. The
witness says' that he was waiting for Briana to return the car on Monday.
He was worried that the rental may be returned late. The defense says
that that was a lie. You were working Monday. Witness stated he was at
home. Defense re-suggests that he is fixating on this point to keep him
and his wife out of jail... Defense starts asking about the witness's car
usage on Sunday. The witness has a hard time recalling details, like
where he went and what time of day it was. The defense went over some
credit card transactions for Sunday to track witness's activities. They
also view credit card transactions for the following day, Monday, May 21,
2001. Defense suggests that the witness was taken to work by his wife,
Kara on Monday. That he was at work on Monday. Objection by the feds,
argumentative. Defense asked witness whether he remembers his testimony
with Mr. Friedman yesterday. He asked you questions leading you to say
that Briana returned on Monday, when in fact you testified earlier that
she appeared late Sunday. The witness says it was the slip of the tongue
and insists that it was Monday. Do you remember that Friedman lead you to
say that it was Monday? The witness says YES, I remember. More questions
are asked about the car and the drop off of the rental. You said you
looked for damages. Did you say that to anyone before yesterday's
testimony? I remember mentioning it to Agent Halla and his lawyer
previous to yesterday's testimony. That’s why I made a note on the
calendar to call Budget to check if there was any damage or extra fees.
Meeting with Kara, his lawyer and Friedman in Seattle on Feb 1, 2007. You
told the FEDS that you couldn't recall why you had to call Budget the week
after the rental. The witness responds, Yes. The prosecutors objects to
him viewing the document. The defense suggests that he is seeing these
documents, and then these documents are triggering his memory, but then it
becomes the memory of the document, and not the facts. 2 different
things. Return to discussion about Monday evening. Did the car smell
like gasoline? Nope. Did you see any damages or touch up paint, or any
dents to the rental car? No. They discuss Briana's arrangement for
rental car usage and the claim by the government that this rental car was
used in the UW arson. Don’t you find it odd, that Briana didn't even show
up Friday when she was supposed to get the car? The witness states that
was "typical Briana." The defense says, “she doesn't show up the day she
was supposed to get this car.”
Defense and witness talk about how the witness trusted Briana with his
precious child, his treasure. At Feb 1, 2007, meeting with the feds, do
you remember telling them that it was because your bikes were in the shop,
that you rented the car? "That's an over simplification." You said,
after reviewing your calendar, it suggested that your bikes were being
repaired, you work 9 miles away, and wouldn't a rental car be convenient?
The witness states that he was reasoning why the rental would be helpful.
The transcript is accurate but out of context. Defense states that the
witness used the car for his use Sat., Sun, and Monday, and that he wanted
Briana to move her possessions out of this basement. The witness states
that he was doing Briana a favor, and he was also finding his own reasons
for using the rental car. On Feb 1, 2002, Briana moved to California.
Defense recalls a telephone
conversation between Robert and Briana, taking about the move and that she
was looking for something she left at his place. The witness finds it odd
when she shows up the next day, as he thought she was in
California. Jan 21, 2002, Briana lived with you, & got sick & went to
the St. Peter's Emergency Room. Do you recall her stomach pains? "No
memory; she was sick a lot." The defense says Jan 2002 or May 2001? Think
back, are you remembering this wrong? Are you confusing these two events?
The witness refers to the gov’t transcript that Briana used the car on
Sat and not Sunday. The witness states that that transcript was correct.
The defense questions Corrina about the $200 cash deposit from Briana.
The defense asks do you remember Feb. 1st, with Agent Halla you said that
Briana gave you $100 for car rental, phone usage, and storage fees for her
stuff in the basement. But you didn't tell them anything about the $200
from Briana 3 days after the car rental. You didn't tell them any of this
Feb 2007? Your memory gets better as time goes on. Robert says his memory
was triggered by a handwritten document. The defense sarcastically says,
7years ago May 2001? That’s what you
remember? The defense revisits that Corrina is afraid being accused of
purgery, lying, federal offenses, and that is what is driving your
testimony. Defense states again that he is being cohearsed by Agent Halla
that the car was used in the UW arson. Corrina decided to get a lawyer
with his wife, when he knew that this case was not going away. In Feb 1,
2007, in the interview with the feds, Robert told them that Briana had
called to tell him that he'd be questioned by authorities, that she was in
trouble, and that everyone that she knew would be questioned. She also
told you other things; she didn't say to lie. He agrees to all of this.
In the Feb. 1, 2007, meeting with Special Agent Halla and the FBI, you
mentioned a meeting that Briana had in your house, in which she asked you
and your family to leave. Did you tell anyone that before yesterday?
Robert replies, "I'm saying it now; it’s the truth. The defense
suggests that the meeting was about protecting old-growth forests. They
question Robert about whether or not Briana asked him to leave his home.
The defense asks who was there, whether the folks at the meeting were
threatening, did they hide themselves, did they run outside? Robert says
No. He also says that he doesn't know what the meeting was about. This
case is about arson. Robert says, YES. You knew Briana, you trusted her,
she stayed at your home. Robert responds Yes. You knew that Briana did
the Watch Mtn. documentary. Witness says YES. You saw it, you liked it,
Robert responds Yes. That’s Briana Waters, isn't it? Robert says that’s
True. Feb 1, 2007 in your meeting with Agent Halla, your wife believed
that the rental car was predominately for your family. Did you tell them
that on that day? Witness says YES. Defense closed.

(Bob destroyed the credibility of this witness on cross examination. It
seemed obvious the guy was lying to save himself and wife from the threat
of federal criminal charges based on his earliest lies to the FBI. THIS
IS WHY YOU SHOULD ALWAYS ASSERT YOUR RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT UNTIL YOU HAVE
AN ATTYS ADVICE AND ASSISTANCE. This man feels forced to lie to a jury
that holds the rest of his cousin Briana's life in its hands because he
told the FBI he didn't know who Briana was, instead of simply saying "I
don't wish to speak with you without an attorney present. Please leave me
your card and I will have my atty contact you if needed." ) Prosecuting
attorney had a few more questions. Why do you believe your wife said that?
Robert states he felt he had to spin the truth to his wife, that she had
tension with Briana and that if she believed it was a rental for them it
would be easier.
The defense chimes in. So you lied? You tricked your wife? Robert states,
no, that he just convinced her. You said your wife believed the rental was
for you. Robert gets flustered, he says, i dont know, maybe left out
details, , I dont remember. The defense ends with. The good thing about
telling the truth is that you don.t have to remember anything. robert
says, "i think i see what your saying." The witness steps down. The
prosecution then calls 2 nurses. (seperately but I will consolidate since
he asked and received very similar answers) Jackie Brown of St. Peters
hospital, emergency room. and Donna Kravis of Capitol Medical. Both women
work in the Emergency room and are questioned about the policies regarding
logging documentation of new patients and if people are turned away due to
lack of funds. Both nurses state that a patient is triaged to access their
need, never turned away because of lack of money, and that if anyone had
visited the emergency room desk, and started the registration process,
even if they didn’t stay, they still got their name logged. Jackie Brown
stated that the evening of May 19/20 were not busy but not slow either.
Both also stated that there was no record of Brianna waters visiting May
19/20 2001. Jackie Brown did say that there was a record of Briana being
there Jan 2002, but didn’t have the exact date. The witnesses were cross
examined by the defense who said IF there was a fabricated story that
someone was in the emergency room, that person would not show up on your
log, correct? Both agreed. The witness also asked Donna if the emergency
desk was visible from the waiting room. She said yes. He asked if it was
really busy, if someone who didn’t want to wait, might walk out without
being logged or noticed. She agreed. Defense ends.
Witnesses leave the stand.
***

P.M. SESSION, 2/20

Wednesday 20th Feb. 2008. Without jury present, before trial, defense and
prosecutors squabble over who's testifying today. The defense asked the
witness list be given to them a day ahead of time. The judge said,
should've been happening already. The jury enters. The Prosecution
calls Witness David Edwin Peterson Born 1973 moved to Washington moved to
Oly. Lived there from '78 to the present. Real-estate broker. Owner of
1510 5th Ave in Oly. Recognized a photo of William Rogers as renter, knew
him as Todd Hager. Paid rent in cashier’s checks as shown in document.
Avalon as a name was not recognized by witness. Witness did not know him
to grow marijuana on site. Did not know of visitors. Witness owned a
number of properties, some were students. Didn’t want lots of people
renting or parties. He said William Rogers was a good renter, had his rent
on time No cross-examination. Excused. Jen Kolar enters and takes oath.
Prosecution addresses witness. Born and raised in Spokane WA. Attended
Shadle Pk high, graduated 1991. Went to U of Boulder, Applied Math and
Engineering degree. This is where she first met other activists and became
involved in above ground activism. Dad lives in Spokane, mom in Eugene.
Didn't know Lacey Phillabaum, who also went to school at Shadle Park High
(coincidence?). Met her later. Graduated college 1995, applied
mathematics. Got another degree '97 astro-physics. Said she moved to
Colorado worked for COPIRG summer canvasing, where she met activists.
After college she was hired as general manager for computers, computer
consultant, software engineering and eventually moved to Seattle 1999.
Started to date Joe Dibee. Worked for Internet search engine acquisition
software. Prosecution asked about plea agreement, and if she had one with
them to which she said "yes." 2 plea agreements. first of which had 4
charges from WA. She signed agreements on July 31, 2007. The subject of
the agreements was that she tell the truth, and provide testimony in
exchange for a reduced sentence of 5-7 years compared to the previous
sentence she faced of 35years to life. First charge=conspiracy Second
charge= attempt to commit arson in CO at the Ray Gun Club 3rd charge= help
commit UW arson at center for Urban Horticulture, Seattle. 4th= use of
destructive device for UW center. She admitted to a second plea agreement
with the state of WA for the Cavel West arson, July 97. The prosecutors
asked, who will decide your fate? She said "Judge Burgess" whom she sat
before today. Is this any easy decision? "No, these were my friends,
Brianna is my friend, we made a committment to each other to not talk
about the action." May 6, 2004, officer Quimby, special agent, FBI came to
her door to talk about events in Colorado. She did not want to talk, and
when asked, said she wasn’t hiding anything and they left. She then
contacted Kenny Clark to get agents info to her boyfriend Joe Dibee and
summarized this meeting for him. Witness knew Joe Dibee told Kenny about
the FBI visit, and Joe said "we'll spend alot of time in jail, and that he
was scared.”
Prosecution mentions Dec. 10, 2006 (but really they meant 05) Quimby
called Jen’s cell, and pleads her to listen and not hang up. Says that
they know kolar has a great deal of involvement and they want to talk to
her. Prosecutor asked, how did you find out about the 6 arrests of Dec
7, 2005? Witness said, kenny called her and told her to look at the news.
She then was asked and positively Identified Brianna in the courtroom. She
was asked if there was bad blood between them. She said no. She said she
liked Brianna, and really cared about her. Her first activism was in CO
with the environmental center, the Peace center, and Rocky Mt Animal
Defense. Witness describes Rocky Mt animal defense actions were accepted
above-ground activism. She attended meeting in MN in 96, a radical animal
rights conference. Met Jonathan Paul (JP). Discussions at conference
included fur release, Arson as tactic, schematics on devices they also
gave out the addresses of all the fur farms in the US. Prosecutor.
exhibits photo of Jonathan Paul, whom she identified as a leader,
weathly, influencial, handsome, and she soon started dating him. She had a
7-month-long long distance relationship with him. Upon return from MN, JP
asked her to spend time in 97 for 2-4 weeks at his home in Williams, OR.
She flew to Seattle, then to Williams, OR. Prosecutor asked anything
interesting about 97? She replyed that she was sick with e.coli blood
infection and hospitalized. while in williams, He (JP) asked her if she
wanted to join ELF and ALF. She said yes. July 97 they wanted to stop the
slaughter at the facility of Cavel West of wild horses, and she and JP
mixed glycerine soap, with gas and diesel. It took them a few days. They
met up with kevin tubbs (photo recognized), jo dibee and jake (photo of
jake ferguson, jake recognized) They reacted strongly that JP brought a
new unrecognized person, but they agreed to continue the action anyways.
On the night of the action Kevin drove a van and drove to Redmond, OR,
after they parked in the desert they walked down railroad tracks at approx
11 at night. There was a small shed on the side, they made sure no one was
in there. joe drilled the walls, set the devices. poured fuel into the
holes and buturic acid into the ventilation. They finshed and returned to
williams. her travel expenses were covered by JP. There was a communique
put out for ELF, to give attention to the action and make sure it wasn’t
seen as a random act. She didn’t help write it. Prosecution noted the
communique contained information that would only be known by someone
involved in the action. She remained in school till 98. there was an
action 98, attempted arson at Ray Gun Club. action was to stop contest
killing by "local varment militia." Greg Litus also did the action.
Decided to use the same technique as Cavel West for arson, but the
building did not burn down. 1999 developed personal relations with Joe
Dibee in Seattle. The Makah whale hunting issue was an issue both he and
josh harper, Jake Conroy and JP were involved in. summer 99 moved to
Fremont got a job doing software. Prosectors ask a question about Neah
Bay protest. Joe and JP filed suits against each other over the ownership
of the Sea Defense Alliance and its boats. Eventually Joe and her broke
up.
She met Bill Rodgers (Avalon) in 2000 and trained on how to do arsons. She
described him as gentle. Incubator meetings began in 2000 in Oly.
Incubator meetings teach about committing arson. Jan. 2001 santa cruz.
Copy of calendar shows 3 meetings. 1st meeting Santa cruz jan 5-7 held at
hotel, 12 to 15 people. She said her job there was to teach PGP
encryption, Internet security. She explained how nicknames worked and who
had which ones from the list she had. Diver was her. Peaches was Al
Decker. Ishi was Susan Savoie, Sabina was Joyanna Zacker, Jamie was Daniel
McGowan, Leroy (don’t know who that was) Reba was Lacey, Micheal was Rod
Coronado, Puck was Jeff Hogg, Zon(?) was Nathan Block. She helped make
discs for PGP. Handed out disks and directions for them. Oly meeting 5-7
jan., 2001. Rogers borrowed a house. Meeting topic: did Bill Rodgers
molest young women? Asked how folks got to the meeting. Discussion about
Jen’s non activist boyfriend. Approached about genetic engineering by Al
Decker and about doing the UW arson. Al Decker talked to her about
research projects and Tobi Bradshaw and his work. She was approached by
Bill Rogers or someone about participating to cut glass at the UW arson.
Note: she had stain glass cutting experience. May 12th sat. 2001 on Oly
campus, Evergreen, in a sound proof music room. with Briana, Bill,
Chelsea, Stan, Nathan and Joyanna. Preparations for the UW and Oregon
actions. She met Briana thru Bill and saw her only a few times socially.
She tries not to talk about the arsons. Said her life changed soon after
the UW action. She said she didn’t see a positive effect and walked away
from "all this." No recollection of meeting prior to arson. May 20, 2001,
drove to Greenlake Bar and Grill in her car. Met people from Oly. 5 people
total: Jen, 2 females, 2 males, and bill (we know this doesn’t add up, but
she said this) She said one female was Briana. They drove together from
the bar in a rental and parked. Crossed field to the UW center, Briana
stayed as lookout, Jen proceeded to cut the glass. Some broke in a loud
manner. Briana radios about security car. They sat quiet and then
proceeded. They removed a small aquarium and papers from the office. they
placed fuel bags and left.
(court recess)
may 21 2001. Jen kolar id's backpack she used that night. recap'd setting
of devices. described driving back home and heard nothing on her police
scanner. Saw headlines the next day. exhibits shown pictures of the bar,
end of street at UW, close up/ place where brianna was lookout, the bush.
A 2nd action was done the same night for more impact, a sister action at
jefferson poplar. she didn’t draft the communique but she saw it. Oct
2001. Joe dibee approaches Jen about wild horses to be slaughtered. Said
he owed a funder an animal rights action. Oct 11, 2001, drove to nevada/CA
border to meet with group. Stan brought incendiary devices. She was
surprised it was an arson and not just a release. Suprised stan brought
the devices. They camped. Joe maced self in the eye. They got fuel in
Reno.Delayed the action a day due to Joe’s eye.
They had handsaws and Stan and her moved animals to the edge of corral,
away from where they'd set fire. They set 4 devices under a truck and by
buildings. The horses wouldn’t leave. They tried to force them, and then
they left the gate open for horses to leave. Joe and her returned to
seattle after. she wrote communique and sent oct 17, 2001 with Joe and
sent from a cafe in seattle. Sent to ELF press office. Moved in with non
activist boyfriend (still dating). lost touch with activists , saw briana
a few times. Dec. 2005, Quimby, FBI approaches her again, she decided to
hire lawyer, Mr. Martin a few days later. she met with gov’t agent Halla,
was "likely to get a reduced sentence in order to put this thing behind
her" Dec 16, 2005, with Feds, discussed book club meetings and Cavel
West and spent only a few minutes on the UW arson, Jen said the UW arson
was the foggiest in her memory. Asked if she remembered UW. She said bill,
herself, 2 females, capitol hill girl, crazy dan and a punk boyfriend. She
didnt remember briana’s involvement at this time. prior to next meeting,
her memory jars, she looked thru phone book and saw briana’s number, told
lawyer that she was involved. When asked if she knew lacey phillabaum
plead guilty to the UW action, she said she didn’t remember Lacey being
involved and then she provided briana’s name to the feds. Identified
papers from a crate she had and a folder given to her from briana. She
also had a daypack, laptop, zip discs from the horticulture center arson.
Folder contained anarchist newsletters. Jen said she never read the
information in the folder given to her by briana until this trial. Defense
attorney Fox objects and asks her questions..... He asked if she knew
who’s handwriting was in the file from briana. He also asked how could
she know for sure that the information was in fact the same info, after so
much time and so many moves. she said she knew it was always in the same
crate.
Exhibit shown to Jen, bill rodgers book on arson. asked where she got it.
she said she gave it to the feds. Bill had asked her to edit the book but
she never got to it. diagrams shown. Fox jumps in again. questions, had
you looked at the file briana gave you? no, not till the gov said to.
objects to evidence. Court overrules, it is submitted anyways.
prosecution has her read excerpts from willful disobedience, describing
activist philosophy including reference to UW horticulture and Jefferson
Poplar fires. She reads about the will of being and anarchist and
destroying industrial society thru well aimed revolt. The joy of vandalism
and sabotage, the release. Read excerpts from Craig Rosebraugh’s direct
action and economic sabatogue. Reads excerpt from what is ELF? Reads about
action protocol. Meeting with fed, discuss book club, Cavel West fire. Feb
4, 2006, drove with agents, to Oly to id where people lived. Id'd Bill
rodgers’ house and tried to find junk yard where folks (Joy and Nathan)
lived and were thwarted by new development. March 6, 2006. Meeting with
feds. They asked about briana and lacey. Did she know personality types of
briana and lacey? would they cooperate? she said briana was mild mannered
and believed she's cooperate. she had no doubt in her mind that briana was
involved in the UW fire.
prosecution is finished.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY NEIL FOX
Established she now lived near the UW. Neighbors could be affiliated with
UW. Established she used the facilities at UW. Talk about her work history
and her college career. Asks if she understands value of work, the large
impact when research is lost. she says yes. he mentions she lives a
double life. lives a lie, and that she doesn’t flaunt her
radicalism. she agrees. yes, yes, yes. establishes that not much is
different in her life since 2001, same job, same boyfriend. only now she's
not an activist. she holds several patents. her current job is
interesting, includes travel. she owns a house and a did own a sailboat (
the manta ray ) that she sold her half to her boyfriend Jonathan
Reichhold to pay her attorney costs. Neil has her admit though, that she
still has full access to the yacht. Nov 2006 ran for a 2-year term as
board member at the yacht club despite her guilty plea agreement a month
earlier in which she was facing 5-7 years in prison. She races yachts for
fun. she is a member of a yacht club (the corinthian). after pleading
guilty in Oct. 2006, don’t you find it strange that you would run for a
position as board member that would run for 2 years? she said no. Defense
asks if went to chicago, and then to hawaii with jonathan
riechold, her current boyfriend. she didn’t remember chicago but said yes
to hawaii. The day after the UW arson (the evening of the arson really
since it was after midnight), did you go to a sailing race? yes. casual
race 4-8pm. she didn’t mention the arson to anyone, including her
boyfirned, returns to normal life. At the susanville fire, when dibee
maced himself and their action was delayed. She contacted her friend Kenny
clark, or kenny cryst, the defense also listed him as going by Richard
Mcdermitt, (deisel mechanic from Makah campaign) to call into work for her
(make some excuse why she wouldn’t be at her work; and to reschedule a
massage she had. May 2004 Quimby comes by at current house in Seattle.
Wanted to talk about CO. She believed it was to talk about some actions or
activities in CO but denied she thought quimby had specifics. The Vail
arson was 2 weeks before Ray Gun Club attempted arson. Greg Litus and Jen
made devices for the Ray gun club action, and it was on the same property
as Nicole Rose Marino lived. Lived at same house as they were building the
devices, Marino was an above ground activist. Nicole never knew about the
activity on site—jeopardized her above ground work. court recesses for
the evening. witness will take the stand at 9:00 am thursday.

NOTES: Defense counsel established Kolar as a cold, rich woman who didn’t
have any remorse for the numerous crimes she committed. She appeared to
be very bright, heavily involved in major parts of planning, research etc.
Question: why would a woman like Kolar, who was in charge of teaching
computer security culture to the group and was heavily involved in lots of
illegal activities, then keep all the PGP disks, info, data, passwords,
old laptops, her old PDA info and other highly suspicious items for YEARS
in her personal belongings???? Could it have been an intentional
insurance policy for her in case she/they ever got busted??? Seems really
strange for a smart woman to be so stupid as to save all this stuff,
including scanners and gloves, and then willingly and voluntarily turn it
all over to the feds once she was caught???

Jose Perez Gonzalez Freedom Fund

The ProLibertad Freedom Campaign
http://www.myspace.com/ProLibertad

ProLibertad@hotmail.com and ProlIbertad.campaign@gmail.com

ProLibertad Hotline: 718-601-4751

On January 18th, Vieques Political Prisoner Jose Perez Gonzalez finished his prison sentence and is now free!! The ProLibertad Freedom Campaign, its friends and supporters, welcomes José and shares his joy in once again sharing the warmth that comes from walking among our people and the pride we all feel for his heroic service.

But Jose still needs our support. He is facing a $10,000 dollar fine to be paid to the U.S. government. We need to help Jose Perez Gonzalez!!

We are asking all freedom-loving people to send a donation to the Jose Perez Freedom Fund to help him pay the fine!! Send any amount between $20-whatever you can to the following address:

IFCO/ProLibertad

418 W145th St.

New York, N.Y. 10031
Please endorse the check or money order to: IFCO/ProLibertad and write “Jose Perez Gonzalez Freedom Fund” in the memo section

Sunday, February 24, 2008

United In Opposition To City Wide Jail Plans

As we continue our struggles against those that seek to maintain our people
chained to it's oppressive, exploitative and enslaving mechanism. I can only
ask that solidarity be manifested in any manner possible inorder to stop these
plans for new jails.
There's gentrification going on throughout the entire city-which is leading to
mass homelessness, a leading cause to someone taking other measures for
survival which may lead to incarceration-I ask is this a mere coincidence?
There's new laws such as every individual who is now arrested will be subjected
to monetary punitive measures also-which will increase arrests for minor
quality of life crimes the likes of trespassing, disorderly conduct, amongst
others-i ask is these coincidences proof it's about money?
There's other hardships being caused by the state that'll cause further
displacement and mass incarceration and individuals need to pull together as
one all issues contributing to these hardships that'll lead to these
incarcerations.
Let's not stay silent till it affects you personally-let's arrange a massive
planning meeting and secure our communities, our freedom from imprisonment, our
housing, our rights.
Check out our video in opposition to some of their tools:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sBgpqH6rac
Correction Commissioner Pushes Against Critics
Read the article here: http://www.nysun.com/article/71076?access=900795
Here's another one below;

Is deal on jail in the wind?
City is negotiating with jail site's owner
By Joe Hirsch
Editor@huntspointexpress.com
The owner of the derelict Oak Point rail yard and city officials have been
negotiating in an effort to resolve the impasse that has stalled the cityís
plan to build a 2000-bed jail in Hunts Point.
Local advocates who oppose construction of the jail are worried that a sweeter
offer from the city will put the jail back on a fast track.
The owner of the property confirmed that a court hearing on his efforts to stop
the city from going forward with its plan has been postponed while the parties
try to strike a bargain.
"The case was postponed again so that we could hopefully reach some kind of
agreement," said owner Steven Smith in a telephone interview.
The case is now scheduled to return to federal bankruptcy court in Connecticut
on Feb. 26. Smith has asked the court to stop the city from taking title to the
land.
The industrially-zoned waterfront scrubland lot has been at the center of
controversy since April 2006 when Department of Corrections Commissioner Martin
Horn announced the city's intention to buy 28 acres of the former rail yard for
a jail that would replace deteriorating jail space on Rikers Island.
Arguing that the city's offering price was artificially low and that the threat
that the land would be taken by eminent domain had spooked other potential
buyers, Smith won a temporary order preventing the city from going forward.
At a status conference in bankruptcy court on Jan. 29, the sides appeared to be
coming closer together than in the past, Smith said.
While Department of Corrections officials contend that the new jail would offer
more humane conditions for inmates, and an easier commute for visitors, Hunts
Point residents and prisoners rights organizations have rallied against the
plan, and persuaded Bronx politicians to oppose it.
Charging that the city has stonewalled requests for information, Sustainable
South Bronx went to court in January and won an order from a state judge, who
told the Department of Corrections it must return to her court by March 21 to
explain why it refused to turn over documents about the plan to opponents of
the jail.

Solidarity Is Our Only Weapon

“The power of effective and dynamic prisoner support was, in my experience, never better illustrated than in the way a prison authority climbed down on this occasion, and it was an incredibly empowering experience to be a part of it.”John Bowden

There are important lessons to be learned from last year’s successful campaign in support of prisoner John Bowden, and in defence of the Anarchist Black Cross. When comrades are attacked, it is not a time for complacency, but a time for determined and decisive action. In our struggle against the State, our collective strength and solidarity is the only weapon we have.

Below, John Bowden gives an assessment of the campaign to defend himself and the ABC against the lies of prison social worker Matt Stillman, who in a crucial parole report, described the ABC as a “terrorist” and “paramilitary” organisation with whom John was in contact.

;">
The decision to mount a campaign against Stillman’s lies about the ABC was made some time before the system actually moved against me, and a view shared by some friends and comrades on the outside was that the decision was premature and would prove ultimately counter-productive by inviting repression against me and seriously prejudicing a parole hearing scheduled for that summer. As far as I was concerned, however, the decision to highlight Stillman’s lies was very much a strategic one and motivated by my concern that should I avoid confronting the prison authorities over Stillman’s report at the earliest possible stage then the report would have gone unchallenged before the parole board that summer. On the basis of his claim that I was linked to a terrorist group my release would have been denied almost indefinitely by the parole board, and no amount of protesting afterwards would have had the slightest effect on that. I knew that any campaign to expose Stillman as a liar had to be organised immediately, no matter what the short-term consequences to myself, and I was, therefore, absolutely clear in my appeal for immediate solidarity from the ABC. Fortunately ex-prisoner Mark Barnsley trusted my judgement implicitly and threw his support behind me right away.

The repression when it came was predictably vicious and cruel, but by then I’d already publicly exposed Stillman’s lies and given warning that I was under attack by the Scottish prison authorities. Their subsequent behaviour in moving me back to maximum-security conditions was therefore immediately seen for what it was – straightforward revenge. As a result, they were never particularly confident about the situation, especially as their treatment of me was now clearly seen as being motivated by the ludicrous claims of Stillman, as opposed to any serious allegation concerning my actual behaviour. By managing to organise a campaign against Stillman early on not only did I provoke the Scottish prison service into moving against me but also pre-empted their actions to a large extent and established the real context of the repression when it came. They were always resentful that I’d managed to do that and frequently accused me of creating a political context to their punishment of me, which eventually would weaken and destroy their attempts to justify and excuse their treatment of me in any other way.

In a very real sense the behaviour of the Scottish Prison Service authorities following my removal back to a maximum-security prison came to be largely dictated by the increasing pressure being applied on them by the campaign outside and the imperative they were now clearly feeling to “resolve” the problem. There was established early on a relationship between the growing intensity and determination of the campaign outside and the increasing involvement of more senior prison bureaucrats and professionals in attempts to deal with the situation – all responsibility for the system’s strategy was being removed from those who had initiated the chain of events, the administration at Castle Huntly Prison, and passed to those with a more direct input at H.Q. level. Had there been no visible campaign of solidarity and support then I’d have rotted away indefinitely in a maximum-security hell-hole while the system did nothing.

Apart from the obvious effect that the campaign was having on the Scottish prison authorities, its psychological effect on me was significant. Even during my lowest moments when I really struggled to make the re-adjustment to being back in conditions of maximum-security, the knowledge that on the outside good committed comrades were campaigning and fighting on my behalf sustained and strengthened me immeasurably. Isolation is a weapon used by the prison system to weaken and dis-empower prisoners, and my removal back to a high-security prison was clearly intended to demoralise and dispirit me, as well as sever my contact with friends and sources of emotional and psychological support on the outside. Leeds ABC, especially, were determined that wasn’t going to happen and so flooded the jail I was in with letters and cards of support every day, reassuring and encouraging me that no matter how deeply the system buried me in here I would not be forgotten, and in fact the longer I was held the more intense the campaign on my behalf would become. The volume of mail I was receiving at this time was also being monitored and handled by screws and administration of the prison holding me and it had an obvious effect on their treatment of me. They were clearly anxious to avoid confrontation with me and risk an escalation in the claims of victimisation being made by my supporters on the outside. This provided me with valuable psychological space in which to adapt to my surroundings and focus on exposing Stillman’s lies.

Soon after my return to maximum-security conditions at Glenochil Prison, the administration there decided to provide a link of communication between myself and senior governors at the prison by appointing Charlie Kelly, a Senior Psychologist, as that conduit. Initially, Kelly was instructed to try and persuade me that it could be in my interests to keep my head down and desist from rocking the boat. When knowledge of the campaign outside began to filter in to Scottish Prison Service H.Q. Kelly’s role changed from one of conveying warnings to one of seeking out negotiation and compromise. At one stage he admitted that the degree of obvious political support mobilised on my behalf had surprised and unnerved the Scottish prison authorities who were simply not accustomed to prisoners in Scotland having that sort and degree of political support. If unaccustomed to facing that degree of prisoner support, the Scottish prison authorities were also seriously hamstrung by the sheer ridiculousness of Stillman’s lies and their inability to defend them. In the usual course of events the prison system and those who administer it operate in the confident knowledge that there is no accountability to their actions and behaviour towards prisoners. Any lie, no matter how obvious, can be levelled against a prisoner, isolated from the outside world and powerless, and no restraint on the repression unleashed by that lie. When the Scottish prison authorities realised that Stillman’s lies were being publicly exposed and campaigned against by an organised political group on the outside it took fright and then began to try and distance itself from Stillman.

Six months after my transfer to Glenochil, the Scottish Prison Service commissioned an “updated psychological” risk assessment report on me, and the conclusions of its author, Senior Psychologist Dawn Harris, made a stark and bewildering contrast to Stillman’s earlier report on me. While Stillman had written of my contact with a dangerous paramilitary group fanatically dedicated to terrorism, Harris referred to the ABC as a perfectly legitimate and peaceful group committed to prisoners’ rights and in fact a very positive vehicle for my anger against the prison system! This was a complete volte-face on the part of the Scottish Prison authorities, who by now were desperate to nullify the campaign, even if it necessitated a climb-down and abandonment of Stillman. Harris recommended that I be returned to an open prison as soon as possible, and this represented a definitive gesture on the part of the system that it was anxious to call a truce and end the ABC campaign. The power of effective and dynamic prisoner support was, in my experience, never better illustrated than in the way a prison authority climbed down on this occasion, and it was an incredibly empowering experience to be a part of it.

Following the submission of Dawn Harris’ report she returned to Glenochil Prison to warn me about continuing the campaign and undermining the “corporate integrity” of the Scottish prison system by placing on the internet internal prison reports about myself, such as Stillman’s and her own. Her message was clear: the campaign had hurt the system and it wanted it stopped right now! By then I was in a position to suggest that the campaign was directly linked to my treatment in prison and would therefore remain active and vocal while I continued to be victimised. She was sent to offer a “deal” – call off the campaign and my situation would improve significantly. The reality was the ABC’s campaign had broken their will to continue the repression and now they were desperately looking for a way out.

By this time Stillman was completely abandoned by them, and three months after my return to an open jail Perth and Kinross Council officially upheld my complaint that Stillman had lied about the nature of the ABC.

The fighting spirit and commitment of Leeds ABC, especially, in defending me had succeeded and should represent a lesson to all prisoner support activists that victory against the prison system is possible providing they’re prepared and willing to actively fight on behalf of prisoners.

John Bowden

Which Prisoners Should Receive Support?

Chris Dirt McIntoshWhen environmental and animal rights advocates are sentenced to lengthy prison terms—many as “terrorists”—they depend on the support of friends, family and the larger activist community. They need money in their commissary account. They need books and magazines. They need visitors, phone calls, and perhaps above all else, according to many current and former prisoners I’ve interviewed, they need letters: sometimes mail call is the only thing to look forward to in prison. The support, or lack of support, of these activists also sends a message to the government and to other activists.
But doing all this prison support work can be time consuming and draining. Base-line decisions have to be made about what, at bare minimum, qualifies a prisoner for support from the wider activist community. And lately, many activists have been struggling with what disqualifies a prisoner from receiving support.
Chris “Dirt” McIntosh attempted to burn down a McDonalds in Seattle, in 2005, and is serving an eight-year prison sentence (his guilty plea dropped it down from a minimum of 30, as the government was pushing to use “terrorism” laws against him). The crime was claimed by both the Animal Liberation Front and the Earth Liberation Front.
The Earth Liberation Prisoners Support Network just announced it is ending all support for McIntosh, and encouraging others to do the same, after investigating racist and sexist comments he has made. The support network says:
1) McIntosh has adopted White Supremacist views whilst in prison. A number of people have contacted ELP saying that McIntosh has started to associate with a racist gang and has even gone as far as to get a racist ‘white power’ tattoo. In a letter to one of his supporters McIntosh enclosed a photo of himself and referred to his tattoo which was not visible in the photo. He told another supporter how he would show off his tattoo upon his release from prison.
[As an aside, that’s quite a strikingly different prison experience than, for instance, http://www.myspace.com/andystepanian Andy Stepanian, who just sent a letter celebrating the work of the Black Panthers and urging animal rights advocates to support the San Francisco 8. “The Panther fed our mornings with free breakfasts and our hearts with power. The Panther took this love and handed it to our captors like Valentine’s flowers. The Panther stole the hearts of the ghetto and white privilege alike.”]
2) McIntosh, through his Social Darwinian beliefs, thinks that ‘might makes right’, or as he puts it in one of his letters “supremacy to the strongest”.
3) McIntosh has told at least one female supporter that it is okay for a man to rape a woman (under his ‘might makes right’ theme).
4) ELP has had it confirmed that since going into prison McIntosh has abandoned his vegetarian diet and has reverted to eating meat.
I have never spoken with McIntosh, but on his website there are some notes along those lines. In October, 2007, he wrote that he had asked to be removed from prisoner support lists because “I had become frustrated and disillusioned by the resistance to evolution within the struggle… Also, I don’t understand why the foremost natural law - might makes right - is not held paramount.” He then had a change of heart, saying “I need mental and emotional support.”
This isn’t the first time prisoner support networks have struggled with these issues. Resist.ca, an anarchist collective that hosts websites and provides technical support to activists, came under fire recently for hosting the website of Darren Thurston’s support group. Thurston, you’ll remember, is one of the cooperating defendants in the Operation Backfire cases, where activists were rounded up and charged with serious property crimes committed in the name of defending the environment. [Here’s a previous post on Thurston, “Cooperator, Snitch or Something Else?”]
A couple groups have refused to work with Resist.ca any longer. Here’s a statement from one:
Wii’nimkiikaa removed its site from resist.ca as an act of solidarity with those ‘Green Scare’ defendants who have chosen not to collaborate nor snitch on others. ‘Wolves Not Sheep’, the archive of the Vancouver Native Youth Movement also removed its site from resist.ca at the same time for the same reasons.
But as someone commented in a discussion on the Infoshop website:
I’ve read one irresponsible call for activist sites to boycott Resist. This takes criticism and differences of opinion to a puritanical level, which I can’t support. Our radical tech infrastructure, as well as much of our alternative media, are in a precarious situation already. Organizing a campaign to disrupt a radical ISP over a difference of opinion is in my opinion just as bad as snitching.
What do you think? What are the bare-minimum requirements for supporting “Green Scare” prisoners?

Saturday, February 23, 2008

MOVE 9 Parole Hearings set for April!

infoshop news Feb 23, 2008

Almost 30 years after the Aug. 8, 1978 police siege on MOVE's West Philadelphia home, the remaining eight prisoners are eligible for parole. Phil Africa is asking for people to write letters of support to The Parole Board.

I received the message below from my friend Dave, who is in touch with Phil Africa, one of the eight remaining MOVE prisoners. As Dave explains, this really is an important time, so please help spread the word, and also please write a letter to the Parole Board as Phil is asking. Their imprisonment has been such an injustice, and now after 30 years, they can be released if we apply enough pressure.

Recently I have written an article on The MOVE 9 and interviewed journalist Linn Washington Jr. about covering MOVE since the 1970s. Also, Ramona Africa recently was interviewed by Uprising Radio. And of course, there is the documentary about MOVE, narrated by Howard Zinn, viewable online at Brightcove or You Tube. MOVE's website is onamove.com

Stay tuned for more information and coverage in the coming months!

Parole for the MOVE 9!

Hans Bennett

Abu-Jamal-News.com

URGENT CALL FOR THE MOVE 9!

Phil Africa says that the MOVE 9 can really use letters and calls to the PA Parole Board this month and next [February & March]. Letters supporting their release can make a big difference. The Board will be having a hearing in April. After THIRTY years, our brothers and sisters are finally up for parole. If not given probation this year, they may all be forced to serve another SEVENTY. They have almost completed their minimum sentence [of the 30-100 year sentence]. Let's bring them home where they belong in August 2008!

This April parole hearing is SO important. Letters and calls to the Parole Board now can really help. Phil is asking that folks send copies of their letters to him. He wants to take a pile of copies of our letters to the hearing as a show of public support.

It is probably a good idea for folks to send letters to each of the nine Board members. The chairperson was appointed by Ed "1985 Bomber" Rendell so don't count on her getting your message to the whole Board. Their individual names are on this web page:

http://www.pbpp.state.pa.us/pbppinfo/cwp/view.asp?a=3&q=154178&pbppNav=|

Letters can all be sent to this address:

[name of Board member], Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 1101 South Front Street, Suite #5100, Harrisburg, PA 17104-2517, tel: (717) 787-5699

Please send copies of the letters to Phil at:

William Phillips Africa #AM-4984, SCI-Dallas, 1000 Follies Rd., Dallas, PA 18612

For supporters to brush up on the history of MOVE and the "MOVE 9," this recent 45-minute talk by Ramona is great:

http://pittsburgh.indymedia.org/news/2007/08/27830.php

Letters and phone calls to the Board are needed NOW. Let's bring 'em HOME. 30 years is too much already, 70 more is unthinkable.

Peace All! Ona MOVE!!!

Dave

Update on Arrested Los Angeles Animal Rights Activists

ELP is not sure what these two have been arrested for, bit it appears it is not for animal rights reasons. However both are known within the animal rights community.

http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20080221133212946

Update on Arrested Los Angeles Animal Rights Activists

Thursday, February 21 2008 @ 01:32 PM PST
Contributed by: Anonymous
Views: 173

Laura is doing fine in the Lynwood facility in a dorm-style room with
160 other women. She makes it sound a bit like a slumber party. She gets
regular visits from Dave Rutan who can visit over lunch. The good news
about Kevin is that he is not in Twin Towers and is in dorm-style living
out near Magic Mountain.

Their pre-hearing/arraignment (I'm getting conflicting reports) is Feb.
26th at 8:30 am at the Los Angeles Municipal Court in downtown LA,
Division 50, 210 W. Temple St. They may not be able to see you if you
go, but they would like to know that you are there supporting them.

To write to them, please use these updated addresses:

(note: please misspell her name if you write to her)
Maura Michlle Lungarlli, booking # 1167062
Terminal Annex
P.O. Box #86164
Los Angeles, CA 90086-0164
USA

Kevin Olliff, booking #1167029
Terminal Annex
P.O. Box #86164
Los Angeles, CA 90086-0164
USA

Tammy Grimes Sentence

ELP Information Bulletin (23rd of February 2008)

Dear friends

First off I would like to thank everyone who responded to ELP's information request earlier today asking if anyone knew what sentence the American animal rights activist, Tammy Grimes, had received following her conviction for resucing a dying dog from horrific conditions.

ELP can report that yesterday Tammy was sentenced to 300 hours community service and ordered to pay the cost of the trial (estimated to be $1,700 dollars). The Judge also ordered Tammy to remove everything 'Doogie' related (the name of the saved dog) off any website she has control or influence over.

ELP understands that Tammy and her supporters will be appealing against this extremely harsh sentence, especially as all Tammy did was save the life of a dying dog which was being kept in horrific conditions.

For more information on the sentencing check out http://www.all-creatures.org/alert/alert-20071217.html#up

+++++++++

Earth Liberation Prisoners Support Network
BM Box 2407
London
WC1N 3XX
England
www.spiritoffreedom.org.uk

Mob Frees 29 Police in Guatemala

By JUAN CARLOS LLORCA | Associated Press February 22, 2008

GUATEMALA CITY - An angry mob in Guatemala that took 29 policemen
hostage released the officers Friday in exchange for talks with the
government on legalizing their lands and possibly dropping charges
against a jailed farm leader, a human rights official said.

The standoff began late Thursday when a crowd surrounded the police
station in the Caribbean coastal town of Livingston, disarmed the
agents and took them in boats to their remote village of Maya Creek.

The mob of hundreds threatened to kill the officers unless
authorities agreed to release a jailed farm leader accused of leading
land seizures.

Guatemalan officials and the Human Rights Prosecutor's office worked
to negotiate an end to the 32-hour standoff.

"We spoke with our people in the town, and I can confirm that the 29
agents were released and are in perfect health," Rolando Yoc, the
human rights office's chief advocate, told The Associated Press.
Police officials had originally put the number of kidnapped officers
at 30 but later said there were 29.

Farm leader Ramiro Choc, who was arrested Feb. 14 on charges of
illegal land invasion, robbery and illegally holding people against
their will, had urged his supporters to release the police officers
in a telephone call from jail on Thursday. Officials accuse Choc of
inciting community residents to invade land and take over protected
nature reserves.

Members of the mob told human rights prosecutors they had occupied
the disputed land for more than a decade and that a powerful person
had been trying to kick them out, Yoc said.

Following the release of the officers, the government promised to
help Maya Creek residents legalize their land and to see if charges
could be dropped against Choc, the human rights official said.

Five organizers from a local farmers union and community
representatives will be transported by plane to the capital to
negotiate with the government.

Tammy Grimes

ELP Information Request (23rd of Februray 2008)

Dear friends

The American animal rights activist, Tammy Grimes was due to be sentenced yesterday for her rescuing of a dying dog from horrific conditions in September 2006.

Does anyone know what sentence Tammy received?

Below is an open letter written by Tammy about the incident.



Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:33:13 +0100
Subject: Open Letter from Tammy Grimes December 17, 2007







Open Letter from Tammy Grimes, December 17, 2007

Dear [name deleted]
Doogie Moved to Blanket


On September 11, 2006, I rescued a dog that was dying at the end of a chain in a muddy yard in a small Pennsylvania town. I was subsequently arrested. A little over a year later, on December 15, 2007, I was convicted of theft and receiving stolen property.

The last year has been the most traumatic and the most inspirational of my life. I have been labeled a "terrorist" a "vigilante", a "publicity hound" and an "anarchist." I have been called a hero. I have been humbled by encouragement and well wishes from people all over the world. I have been attacked in person and in print in my small town, where the prevailing view is that it is fine and dandy to tie a dog to a tree or a dog house and leave it to pace back and forth for year after agonizing year, in skull-cracking cold or 100-degree weather, with nothing but parasites for company.

I don't regret what I did. Not for one second. And when it comes to rescuing dogs and changing minds and laws, I'm just getting started. Here's why.

The dog at the center of all this, a dog we would eventually name Doogie, had been lying in the mud and rain for three days, chained to the dog house he had been attached to for years. He was unable to stand and was pawing the air in desperation. His owners chose to go four-wheeling and to work on Monday instead of getting him the vet help he needed and deserved, but most importantly was entitled to by law. A distraught neighbor had called animal control repeatedly over the course of the three days. But as so often happens, no "humane" officer called back. No one ever showed up. (Surprised? Trust me, it happens all the time, and not just in my town.) The frantic neighbor eventually reached out to me and to Dogs Deserve Better.

What I did next set in motion a chain of events that would eventually garner national attention, the wrath of some, the support of others, and an agonizing trial during which I had to listen to lies and mischaracterizations for three days: I removed that dog's chain and I took him to the veterinarian. It was all very clear to me as I lifted the emaciated, wet dog into my van. I had been in animal rescue long enough to know that I would probably be labeled the villain while the dog's caretakers wouldn't even be questioned for leaving a suffering dog on the ground for three days, not to mention all the years they tied him to a shabby box in the yard; letting his toenails to grow so long they were curling back toward his pads, denying him vet care when he most needed it.

But I also knew that what I was doing was morally correct. It was the compassionate thing to do. It was the only thing I could do. Time was of the essence. A dog was suffering. I felt he was dying.

In court, it became increasingly clear that our 'humane officer' left me "holding the bag," in this case little more than a bag of bones. He had been offered the dog by me as part of what should have been a cruelty case against the caretakers 2 times on September 11th, but ignored me both times. On the witness stand the officer, in an attempt to cover his own hide, stated he told me and the vet assistants not to remove Doogie from the vets. This is absolutely untrue, and if he had done so I would not have been put in the position of choosing between Doogie's skin and my own.

So, now I'm guilty. Ah yes, guilty of caring about a dog that had been left to die. Guilty of putting myself and my reputation on the line because I can't stand to see suffering. Yes, call me guilty.

At Dogs Deserve Better, we see dogs in horrific situations every day. Sometimes these sad animals are neurotic or aggressive from years at the end of a chain. Sometimes, they are half-starved or have collars embedded in their necks. Sometimes they are dead. So, why go out on a limb for one old dog? Why take a moral stand in this one instance? Why challenge a law, when Dogs Deserve Better has stuck to the letter of the law in almost 1,000 rescues to date?

The answer is simple: because it was the right thing to do. Because our laws regarding personal property and animal welfare are contradictory and archaic. Because Michael Vick can't kill his dogs, but the Arnolds can. Because, at the end of the day, I knew I simply couldn't live with myself if I walked away from that dog and left him to suffer there in the mud.

Doogie Walking and Chipper

Doogie blossomed after we got him medical care and showed him a warm bed and a little love. He not only walked again, but actually ambled around with a spring in his step. Imagine. A dog that for many years could not take more than a few steps before being yanked back by a chain, was trotting around a yard and enjoying soft hands and a warm home!

I have no illusions about my life's work. I know some people will never get it. I know some people think "it is just a dog." I know some people consider me the representation of all that is evil because I have compassion for animals and because in one isolated incident, where the clock was ticking and life was ebbing, I took someone's "property" -- property that the owners had for all intents and purposes abandoned on the ground like a used-up piece of junk. But I don't care what my detractors think because I now know that I have more support, more friends, more allies, than I ever dreamed possible.

The support I have received during the last year has made me stronger in my convictions and more steadfast in my work. I know that the vast majority of reasonable, educated, compassionate people believe that it is barbaric beyond imagining to chain a dog for its life. I know that anti-tethering laws will continue to be passed in states, cities and counties across this country. ("No-brainers" a recent news article called these laws.) And I'm going to work harder than ever to make sure that happens.

Five years ago, when I started Dogs Deserve Better, people laughed in my face when I talked about laws against chaining. Today, three states have passed laws that severely limit the practice, as have hundreds of cities and counties, some banning chaining altogether. I know that I will see the day when our society sees tying a dog to a doghouse for 15 years as abhorrent as eating a dog.

Oh yes, make no mistake: times change and morality and compassion eventually triumph over ignorance and stupid, blind habit. Slavery ended. Women got the right to vote. Wife beating is no long accepted. You don't see a lot of kids working in mines or sweat shops anymore. Even dog fighting was made a crime.

I can't help but think about Rosa Parks. We can be sure she never regretted refusing to budge from that Montgomery bus seat. And though I may never be as brave as she was, I'll never regret taking a half-dead dog from someone's yard.

In memory of Doogie. May he rest in peace.-Tammy Grimes, December 17, 2007

To read the press release and view just-released photos, visit the Doogie page.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Puerto Rican suspect's extradition ordered in 1983 Conn. robbery

February 21, 2008


SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico(AP) - ­A judge on Thursday ordered an alleged member of a militant Puerto Rican independence group extradited to the U.S. mainland to face charges in a 1983 robbery in Connecticut.

U.S. District Judge Marcos Lopez rejected a bail request by Avelino Gonzalez Claudio, saying he "represents both a flight risk and a risk to the community."

Gonzalez, 65, was arrested by the FBI two weeks ago in his native Puerto Rico, where he had been working as a teacher under an assumed name.

He is one of more than a dozen people indicted in the Sept. 12, 1983 robbery of about $7 million from a Wells Fargo armored car depot in West Hartford, Conn. He faces charges including robbery and transportation of stolen money.

His lawyer, Juan Ramon Acevedo, said it was not clear when Gonzalez will be extradited.

Gonzalez is suspected of belonging to Los Macheteros, or the "machete wielders," a group that seeks Puerto Rico's independence from the United States and has claimed responsibility for a series of bombings and attacks in the 1970s and 1980s.

The FBI is still seeking two more fugitives in the robbery, including a brother of Gonzalez and the alleged mastermind, who is believed to be in Cuba.

The ProLibertad Freedom Campaign

http://www.myspace.com/ProLibertad

ProLibertad@hotmail.com and ProlIbertad.campaign@gmail.com

ProLibertad Hotline: 718-601-4751

On January 18th, Vieques Political Prisoner Jose Perez Gonzalez finished his prison sentence and is now free!! The ProLibertad Freedom Campaign, its friends and supporters, welcomes José and shares his joy in once again sharing the warmth that comes from walking among our people and the pride we all feel for his heroic service.

But Jose still needs our support. He is facing a $10,000 dollar fine to be paid to the U.S. government. We need to help Jose Perez Gonzalez!!

We are asking all freedom-loving people to send a donation to the Jose Perez Freedom Fund to help him pay the fine!! Send any amount between $20-whatever you can to the following address:

IFCO/ProLibertad

418 W145th St.

New York, N.Y. 10031

Please endorse the check or money order to: IFCO/ProLibertad and write “Jose Perez Gonzalez Freedom Fund” in the memo section.


TEACH-IN ON GRAND JURIES, REPRESSION, AND RESISTANCE

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 23rd, 2-5 PM

St. Mary's Church

521 West 126th Street (between Amsterdam and Broadway).

Participants will include:

Ana Lopez and Youth Resisters, Hostos January 11 Grand Jury Resistance Campaign

Julio Rosado, Legendary Independentista and Grand Jury Resister

Esperanza Martell, Iglesia San Romero de las Americas

Roger Wareham, December 12th Movement

Robert Boyle, National Lawyers Guild

Bob Lederer, Grand Jury Resister/Resistance in Brooklyn

NYC Coalition members

Friends of MOVE

And others to be announced

Learn from and support the Puerto Rican Independence Movement and the young Puerto Rican cultural workers who have been served notice to appear before a Grand Jury in Brooklyn - a serious attack on the Puerto Rican Independence Movement, on the Puerto Rican community, and on all of our civil liberties. Learn how the grand jury process is part of the state's attacks on the progressive movement in this country. Learn about the history of resistance to this repression. How does this particular governmental attack on us fit into the overall picture of repression and fascistic developments?

Learn about the attacks on December 12th, the

Free Mumia Movement, the MOVE organization, and many others.

There will be extensive time for questions and role playing to helpPeople understand the grand jury process, and to strengthen our courage and ability to resist.

Sponsored by: Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition, Hostos January 11th Grand Jury Resistance Campaign, and the December 12th Movement.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Briana Waters Trial: Notes from 2/15 and 2/19

1) Notes from February 15, Part One: 9AM – aprox. 10:30AM
2) Notes from February 15, Part Two
3) Notes from February 19

***

NOTES FROM FEBRUARY 15, PART ONE: 9AM – APROX. 10:30AM

Court Notes
Briana Waters Trial
Judge Burgess
February 15th 2008
9AM


(Prosecutor Friedman questions witness Lacey Phillabaum)
P: Recall we were talking about the morning after the Arson. Recall
discussions of damage to car?

L: May have been when I talked to Avalon about damage. He reassured that
the damage was minimal.

P: Plans to repair?

L: He said he'd get touch-up paint wand to fix minor scrape

P: Did you see the communiqué about what happened?

L: Yes, it did.

P: Ex.#349 Communiqué written after arson

(A bit of confusion happened since the exhibit wasn't inside the folder.
It was found outside the folder)

P: Read it to the Jury?

L: Part 1: Sent by ELF pg 1. Center for Urban Horticulture(CUH). At 3:15AM
Monday May 21, 2001, Researcher Toby Bradshaw's office was reduced to
smoke and ashes. His research would release mutant genes into the
environment. The building was inspected for occupants then incendiary
devices were set. We intended to only destroy his lab but fire spread due
to poor response of the firemen. We are determined to stop genetic
engineering. Cites other arsons of labs and genetic engineering
experiments.

Part 2: Clatskanie, Oregon. Jefferson Poplar Communiqué. Done because
hybrid poplars are an ecological nightmare threatening (native?)
populations (poplar is not native to the NW). You cannot control what is
wild.

P: Over time, did you learn more about the Center for Urban Horticulture?

L: Yes, not sure if I knew at the time but started to understand what the
offices were about. Looked at it in a limited way, because didn't want to
look back. While working for Oregon Tilth I started to understand what a
master-gardener was and more about the community working for sustainable
agriculture and the damage I had done to the community. It impacted me
especially because of the books that were burned. I felt a lot of remorse.

P: Did you consider other arsons?

L: No.

P: Did you commit any other arson?

L: No, I started to distance myself from ELF and radical environmentalism.
It took from 1995 to 2001 to be willing to do this. This case has forced
me to look back.

P: Did you have a growing relationship with Meyerhoff?

L: Our relationship grew. We got to know each other and began
reintegrating back to mainstream. It was hard to do.

P: Did Stan do more arson?

L: I don't know.

P: Does part of distancing yourself have to do with Stan Meyerhoff?

L: First part of getting uninvolved was admitting to each other that we
didn't want to be involved. Which was hard to do having met in this
context. After 9/11 I decided it was intolerable to be involved with
anything like this. We shared a mutual reinforcement of values.

P: Do you remember other discussions about him becoming uninvolved?

L: Yes, I told him my opinions after 9/11 when I read in the paper about
the thing in California. Not sure if he was involved but I made it clear I
thought it was unacceptable. Arson as a political tactic was completely
illegitimate given the political context after 9/11. I focused on being
non-violent after 9/11 and felt unacceptable to be involved.

P: Did you see Briana Waters, Justin Solondz, or Avalon after the arson?

L: BW-No. JS-don't think so. Avalon-pretty sure no. Jen Kolar, yes at a
book-club meeting in Sisters, OR shortly after the arson. Since then I
have not seen Jen Kolar.

P: Have you had any other direct contact with Jennifer Kolar since 2001?

L: No phone, e-mail, no friend of a friend (word of mouth), No Contact

P: During 2000-2001 did you use marijuana?

L: Yes

P: How often?

L: I had a problem, I used it frequently.

P: Did you use before or around the time of the planning meetings?

L: No, Avalon had a strong ethic of not using drugs. What we were doing
was serious.

P: Did you use ecstasy during that time?

L: no

P: Since? How Often?

L: Yes, The last time was 2002. Four times since December 2001.

P: Did drugs affect your memory of events?

L: No

P: Why?

L: They didn't make me hallucinate. I was absent minded when I smoked but
didn't have a memory problem. Things I remember, I remember clearly.
Things I don't, I can't remember.

P: You moved to Charlottesville?

L: Yes

P: Stan moved to the east coast?

L: Yes

P: Where were you living when Stan was arrested?

L: I was living in DC when Stan was arrested December 7, 2005

P: How did you learn about the arrest?

L: He was living in a house I previously rented a room in and I talked my
old housemate. I was calling my former housemate b/c I had not heard from
him.

P: You had no contact with Government?

L: Not until late night the FBI left a voicemail about Stan being
arrested. The next day I moved Stan's car in Charlottesville. My car was
in Charlottesville too so my friend drove and I move his car so it
wouldn't get towed. I got a copy of search warrant. He called me from
Agent's phone. Brief conversation. I was yelling hysterically get an
attorney and not to say anything.

P: Did you speak to the agent?

L: NO. Stan gave me the agent's #. The next day or two later, I called the
#. It was as long as Monday before I called. I had spoken with Stan on
Friday. I asked if Stan retained counsel and where is the agent. Would not
answer. There was no discussion of arson.

P: Did you have a conversation about the arson with Stan after the next
contact with Government?

L: No

P: After that, when was the next contact you had with the government?

L: President's Day Weekend 2006. My father got a call from FBI and relayed
the substance to me. Feb. 21 was Tuesday so the call was on Saturday Feb.
18. The substance was that I was likely to be indicted on one if not two
counts of arson.

P: Did the agent provide details who was involved?

L: No

P: What happened after that?

L: On Monday, I spoke with an attorney in Seattle and on Monday we had a
preliminary conversation with the attorney, my father and myself. We met
with the FBI on Tuesday the 21st of February.

P: Were you promised anything at the meeting?

L: I was not promised anything. I was told things would be better for me
if I was forthcoming. I signed a piece of paper that said I wasn't
promised anything.

P: Who provided information?

L: I provided all the information the agent asked where I was born and
whole story came tumbling out.

P: Did the government provide any info on the arsons between the time of
the call to your family and the meeting with the FBI?

L: No. To this day I have not been provided significant information from
the government about what happened. I am relying on memory alone.

P: Regarding the reverse proffer. Did you receive any information?

L: There was no information provided by the Feds/government.

P: Do you have reason to believe your attorney received any information?

L: No

P: You were shown pictures during the investigation. (Brings out a picture
of Justin Solondz ex. 115) Do you recognize this picture? Do you recall
having it shown to you?

L: Yes, that is Justin Solondz.

P: That is what you said, you named him. (Shows another picture ex. 115 A)
Do you recall being shown this picture?

L: Yes, but I was shown a smaller version of this picture.

P: Do you recognize this picture?

L: I didn't know who that was when they showed me. Blown up it looks more
like Justin but not especially no.


(Prosecution is done. Bloom, defense attorney, begins cross-examination of
Lacey)

D: Have we met?

L: No
D: have you met the man here?

L: I believe that must be Mr. Fox.

D: How do you know? Have you read the pleadings? And how?

L: My attorney sent to me the pleadings. I read them on my own when I was
out of jail.

D: Did Mr. Leavey give you this?

L: I have a number of people I seek legal advice from. Mr. Leavey,
Ochenbecker, Matthews, and both of my parents are attorneys.

D: Did Mr. Leavey ask if you would speak to me or Mr. Fox?

L: No. It was never clear to me that you had asked to speak to me. I
thought you were requesting to speak to him not to me.

D: Any reason why Leavey would write to us and say there is no point in
further consultation? She will not agree to an interview or release me or
Mr. Offenbecker to speak to you. Did he say or suggest?

L: No. If it had been relayed to me I would have replied that it would be
important that I speak with Briana. He said that was not a possibility. I
authorized him to evaluate whether he should meet with you.

D: Why did he say she (Lacey) would not agree to meet with me?

L: I authorized him to deal with the situation. I was not willing to meet
with you unless Briana was there, I said to Mr. Leavey.

D: Earlier yesterday Friedman asked if you bear any ill will toward Briana
Waters. Your response was that you have sympathy for everyone in the case.
Is there a reason why you did not answer the question?

L: I bear no ill will towards Briana Waters.

D: Why did you no answer the question yesterday?

L: I was speaking generally not specifically. I have cultivated compassion
for everyone in this case.

D: It's nice for the judge hear, isn't it.

L: I don't think sympathy for my co-conspirators especially helps me. I am
saying what is true, not what will help me.

D: You called Justin Solondz Conner.

L: I don't know what I first knew him as but I knew him as Connor during
events.

D: When did you first meet Conner?

L: During the action in 2001 @ Dusty WA.

D: Who else was at the Dusty WA action?

L: Chelsea Gerlach, Suzanne Savoie, Conner, Me (Lacey), Nathan Block,
Joyanna Zacher, Daniel McGowan, and either Stan Meyerhoff or Avalon, not
sure which.

D: When was Dusty?

L: Not sure. I think it was established yesterday as 2000.

D: When? Was it summer?

L: I don't recall.

D: You met Connor in 2000?

L: Yes, if that's when the action was.

D: Was it August 1st 2000?

L: I don't remember.

D: Where is Dusty WA?

L: I think Eastern Washington, near Pullman.

D: You named 7-8 people. How did you get to Dusty?

L: I might have driven with Chelsea both ways.

D: Your car or her car?

L: Her car. A small compact car.

D: She took her car to the action. You said yesterday that if you couldn't
get a car not associated with activists it was often a deal breaker. She
drove to the site?

L: She took car to the area. We parked a ways away and walked to the site.
We drove to the region in her car. Parked cars in parking lot, took
different cars to action.

D: What cars?

L: Don't know. Maybe Justin's.

D: Registered to his name?

L: don't know, I associated it with him.

D: Did you see New Jersey license plate?

L: I didn't look.

D: What kind of car was it?

L: I believe it was an SUV- a fore-runner.

D: But it was his car? You took his car to the action?

L: It wasn't a high level action. It was an introductory action, pulling
up plants, in a rural area.

D: Significantly different from taking own car to an arson?

L: Yes.

D: You know from the pleadings that Justin's car was used for arson at
Jefferson Poplar farm May 21. Does this demonstrate a lie?

L: No, It demonstrates that things do not always work in an ideal way.
Coming by an anonymous car was difficult.

D: They took a car in his name to Jefferson Poplar tree farm?

L: Cars were often the lynchpin; coming by a non associated car was
difficult. I cannot speak to what happened at Jefferson Poplar farm. I
wasn't there.

D: You were involved in planning the Double whammy?

L: No.

D: Why did Stan Meyerhoff say so?

L: He may recall differently. I was involved at the end of the planning.
The plan was presented to me. Certain planning details were worked out
while I was there. I questioned the decision about how much fuel to use,
but most details were worked out in advance.

D: So you had input into refining the planning?

L: Yes.

D: Were you aware of the fact that Justin's car would be used at Jefferson
Poplar?

L: No. I had no knowledge of what happened at Jefferson Poplar until
afterwards.

D: You met Justin Solondz for the first time at Dusty?

L: That was the first time I took note of him.

D: Was there flirting between you and Justin?

L: No

D: Were you ever at the place where he lived?

L: We went briefly to the bus that Justin lived in.

D: Who else was there?

L: Just Justin and myself.

D: So, it was just you and Justin at his place of residence?

L: Yes.

D: Describe the bus.

L: It was a short bus, renovated to be a living space.

D: A small space?

L: Yes, it generally is when you live on a bus.

D: How did you get to the bus?

L: Justin took me there.

D: Why?

L: I think he needed to get something, I don't know what.

D: Give your best estimation of the amount of time you spent at the bus.

L: Short. An hour or less. Probably less than an hour.

D: What did he get?

L: I don't know.

D: Why did he take you? Did he need you to help get something heavy?

L: No, we were already together for some other reason.

D: What did you do in the less than an hour?

L: I have no particular memory. At some point we had the idea that we
might take a nap. Neither of us had slept. I was on his bed for awhile. I
didn't fall asleep. We left.

D: You had interaction with Justin?

L: I think the implication is that we had a sexual interaction. That is
not correct.

D: Was there anywhere to sit other than the bed?

L: I don't recall.

D: But you remember the bed.

L: It was at the end of the bus. We talked about taking a nap. I am not
sure if he lay down on the bed.

D: You told Agent Halla that Conner took a nap while you were there.

L: I don't remember. I may have discussed it with him. It is unclear
whether Justin was on the bed.

9:44 Stop (break)

D: What were you doing together before you went to the bus?

L: Errands.

D: What kind?

L: Don't recall.

D: How long were you together?

L: I can't say.

D: What day of the week was it?

L: Saturday or Sunday, the weekend before the arson.

D: Where was the bus in relation to the center of Olympia?

L: I don't know Olympia.

D: A rural or urban area?

L: More rural. We drove there in his car - S.U.V.

D: You are unable to tell us how long you were together on that day?

L: Yes.

D: You knew him for several months?

L: I had met him once prior.

D: Had you seen him since?

L: I saw him once maybe twice.

D: When?

L: Once at a meeting prior to UW arson and another time in Eugene briefly.
He was with some other people. I waved when he went by.

D: You had no intimate relations with him.

L: I never had intimate relations with him.

D: Ever heard of Bill Clinton (makes a reference to Monica Lewinsky scandal).

L: I never gave him a blow job either if that's what you're implying.

D: Do you recall when Briana said to you "how dare you have an affair with
my boyfriend"?

L: No.

D: You learned from Briana that Justin had informed her about you and him?

L: I don't think so. I thought they had broken up

D: What about you getting involved with other people's men? Chelsea
Gerlach was with Stan Meyerhoff before you were together. That's your m.o,
isn't it. You think its OK to go after a man because hs is breaking up
with a woman.

L: No.

D: Is there bad blood between you and Chelsea about the way in which you
got involved with Stan?

L: They were broken up. Chelsea and I have an uneasy relationship and my
relationship with Stan is part of it but its not an important part. When
you say "m.o." I feel my sexual history is on trial, but it has no bearing
as to whether Briana Waters was at the UW arson.

D: That's for the jury to decide. Its about whether you bear ill-will
toward Briana, because you didn't answer the question yesterday.

L: I bear no ill-will toward Briana Waters.

D: Briana called you all kinds of names. "Disrespectful, unprincipled, not
fit to be involved with the movement".

L: I recall I went to Avalon and asked "what is going on with Briana? She
seems upset. You put a lot of trust in her." worried about working with
Briana. I told him Justin had told me they were broken up. Avalon raised
his eyebrow, as if it was not consistent with his understanding. Its
reaching for me to remember being grilled by Briana, the memory is hazy.

D: Because of marijuana?

L: No.

D: Because you don't like to remember being called "unprincipled"?

L: No. It was because it was a confusing situation, and I never had
relations with Justin. I didn't even know if she was accusing me of that.
We just discussed taking a nap on the bus.

D: You say your recollection is that it happened on the weekend of the
arson, your conversation with Avalon.

L: I'm not sure when it was.

D: Think about it.

L: Its difficult to distinguish between the two times I was in Olympia.

D: You could do it yesterday.

L: I don't know, did I?

D: You told the jury, this time, that time, etc.

L: Yesterday I testified about the arson. I tried to be as detailed as I
could.

D: How many times have you gone over your testimony with Mr. Friedman?
Have you discussed before yesterday what he would ask you?

L: Yes., One time completely, and abbreviated versions at two other times.

D: When did you go over the full story?

L: Five weeks ago. Jan. 9th.

D: Where?

L: SEATAC Bureau of Prisons Detention Center.

D: How much time did you spend on the complete testimony?

L: We did it quickly, maybe two and a half to three hours.

D: When did you go over abbreviated story?

L: Sometimes last week. He asked about some things in more detail, went
through some things more slowly at SeaTac FDC. We didn't spend a lot of
time on that but I spent a significant amount of time with Mr. Friedman
that day, talking about my concerns, all sorts of issues.

D: Go back to what you remember about Briana saying unpleasant things,
accusing you... do you regard yourself as a feminist?

L: Yes

D: Do you remember her saying your conduct was anti-woman and anti-feminist?

L: The language is familiar. I only remember now when you say it. I
remember I thought Justin was not her boyfriend, Justing told me
otherwise. He said hw was going through problems with his ex-girlfriend.
Of course over time I came to understand he had tension with his close
friend, with whom he was transitioning out of a relationship.

D: You now seem to recall unkind things said to you by Briana. That you
had sexual relations with Justin?

L: You have triggered a hazy memory of something that have happened. I am
unsure of it. It sounds familiar, but I would never attest that such a
hazy memory was correct.

D: Do you thing her pinpointing, describing your unprincipled behavior
might make you feel ill-will? If I were to call you... It seems to be that
your memory is now being revived or refreshed?

L: I have no independent memory. You remind me. Its hazy, I'm not sure of it.

D: However hazy, would it not have triggered ill-will?

L: If I felt there was a genuine misunderstanding, then no.
D: If someone called you an "unprincipled slut". Would you feel ill will?

L: Not if the information was inaccurate.

D: What if it were accurate?

L: If I were an unprincipled slut would it bother me to be called an
unprincipled slut? I don't know because I'm not an unprincipled slut.

D: Who is Jeff Hogg?

L: My ex-boyfriend.

D: Another ex-boyfriend. How many boyfriends have you had since 1996?

OBJECTION

D: Is it true you have no respect for women's boundaries with their men?
If a man interests you he is fair game?

L: No.

D: You know that Jeff Hogg is now with a woman named Cecilia. They have a
baby. You are able to make phone calles, send emails. Have you called
their home?

L: No.

D: Have you sent emails to Jeff?

L: Yes.

D: How many since you self-surrendered?

L: I don't know.

D: You have not been sentenced yet. Your sentence has been put off until
after Briana's trial.

L: Correct.

D: This has happened twice. You have been ready to be sentenced but
learned that the trial was put over and therefore the sentencing. So they
have that hanging over your head. You won't get sentenced until you
testify.

L: Yes.

D: When did you self-surrender?

L: January 2007.

D: In the period of time since how many emails have you sent to Jeff Hogg?

L: Maybe thirty.

D: Has he responded?

L: Yes, we communicate.

D: They censor it in jail, clear incoming and outgoing emails?

L: I assume so.

D: In approximately 30 emails has Jeff told you Cecelia (his wife) is not
at all happy about the emails?

L: I don't know if he told me. I know that Cecilia is not happy about it.

D: You continue to write him.

L: Jeff is a dear friend of 14-15 years.

D: Has he made it clear that Cecilia does not want you to interact?

L: Yes. But I know that Jeff wants to be in touch with me. I get support
from him. Friendship.

D: Does he give you support for anything in return?

L: No, just friendship.

D: Did Jeff get involved with anything illegal?

L: Jeff was at Book Club meetings.

D: Do you have an arrangement that you won't speak about Jeff and you'll
get something after the trial?

L: There is no arrangement between us.

D: Were Stan and Chelsea together for a long time?

L: Yes.
D: There came a time he became your boyfriend, fiance.

L: Yes.

D: Are you married to Stan?

L: No, Engaged. I have an engagement ring that I bought at a dime store.

D: How long have you been intimately involved?

L: We have been partners for seven years.

D: Was it a shock that Stan spoke to the authorities about your activities
after he was arrested December 7th 2006.

L: I don't know what he told them. It was less shocking that he cooperated
than that the arrests happened at all.

D: Have you seen Stan since the arrest?

L: Once

Did he tell you he informed on you?

L: No

D: Did he tell you he gave info to the FBI?

L: I suspected it during the phone call the day after, he said something
fatalistic. Then when I say him he said that he betrayed everyone.

D: Did you come to believe or know he betrayed you?

L: I don't know what he has said about me. At times I thought yes, at
times no.

D: You knew he was naming names?

L: At the visit, he indicated he named others. I pointed to myself, and he
nodded his head. I was trying to know if he told about me.

D: You were named by your own fiance.

L: We weren't engaged at that point. But yes, boyfriend, yes.

D: Is it difficult to communicate with Stan because the authorities monitor?

L: No unmonitored communication with Stan since the arrest, and no
communication now. Always careful about what I said. Personal and general
conversation as opposed to criminal events.

D: No talk about criminal events?

L: Nope.

D: Have you belonged to a Zero Population group? A group that thinks
people shouldn't have children?

L: No. I don't think so.

D: Do you know Briana has a child?

L: Yes.

D: Am I correct that you show disdain for people who have children? Did
you call people with children 'breeders'?

L: I never called them breeders. Never a particular belief of mine. Always
a trend within EF!. I never supported the idea that a vasectomy was doing
your part for the earth.

D: So you didn't call people with children breeders?

L: I am not saying the word never came out of my mouth, but its not what I
think about people with children.

D: You grew up in an upper-middle class family?

L: No middle class youth. My parents are lawyers but it took them a long
time to build their practice. So I am not a rich and spoiled kid.

D: Do you remember editing for Earth First Journal? Do you remember
writing articles describing your family as "upper-middle class" in march
of 1997?

L: Yes. By the time I wrote that my parents were probably upper-middle class.

D: You are not spoiled and rich?

L: No. I didn't grow up spoiled and rich and and I am not spoiled and rich.

D: You grew up in Spokane. You were on the debating team?

L: Yes

D: You were a racing skier?

L: Yes.

D: You went to U of O. Were you on the debate team there?

L: When I attended UW I was working part time, focussed on my studies I
debated only first quarter. I was a debater in High school.

D: You are a writer. You have debating skills. A way with words.

L: Yes

D: You have a way with words, written and spoken?

L: I feel like I have lost my public speaking ability, but I was practiced
in high school.

D: If you stay with your deal, the best sentence for you is three years,
the worst is five years right?

L: Yes.

D: Judge Burgess is sentencing you right?

L: Yes.

D: One of the inputs of the sentence is what the prosecutors tell the
judge about how well you do on the stand, right? Its fair to say you have
an incentive to please the prosecutors.

L: I am not particularly motivated by my plea deal. I am committed to
fulfill it, but emotional and moral commitment which drives me to be
honest is to the researchers who I victimized. I would rather do three
years than five, but I will do no more than five no matter what I say.

D: But if you said you made it all up about Briana the deal would be over.

L: yes. Deal before over if I said I lied.

D: How about the prison attire you are wearing? Do you have to wear prison
clothes at a trial? Who said you couldn't wear street clothes.

L: I wanted to wear street clothes. Mr. Friedman said its to not look like
I am trying to deceive the jury about where I am.

D: Did he say anything about looking sympathetic?

L: I didn't want to look sympathetic and tragic, I wanted to look normal.
He said nothing about sympathy. I understood if I wanted to wear civilian
clothes an effort would have to be made, a request approved. It wasn't
that important to me.

D: Did you tell Mr. Friedman?

L: Yes. He said the reason it was important was that I didn't want to be
hiding that I was in prison, hiding anything.

D: Did it occur to you that someone would ask you if you were in prison?

L: I thought it would be known.

D: You put it on your website, that you were self-surrendering and going
to jail.

L: Friends did, not I. But it was public knowledge, yes.

D: You have not seen Jen Kolar since one time after the arson?

L: Yes, at a book club meeting, Sisters Oregon, one week to four weeks
after the Arson.

D: Where were you living?

L: I lived in Eugene through December 2001.

D: Were the book-clubs incubators? Was it a book club because you didn't
want to call it an arson club?

L: No. It wasn't an arson club.

D: It was about radical action?

L: It was also about the philosophy, and yes, I was a radical activist.

D: After the arson, when you saw reports on TV, did you feel bad?

L: No. I kind of freaked out when I hear the firefighters on the scanner,
but I didn't hear at first about the books that were lost.

D: So no remorse right way? Still into theorizing about how to undermine
the establishment?

L: Yes, I was still a radical activist.

D: Who else was at Sisters?

Chelsea Gerlach, Nathan Block, Joyanna Zacher, Me, Jeff Hogg, Diana Robin,
Jennifer Kolar, Stan Meyerhoff, and Daniel McGowan?

D: Was Briana there?

L: No.

BREAK

***


NOTES FROM FEBRUARY 15, Part Two


Feb 15, 2008
1PM

Bloom is cross examining Lacey Phillabaum

D We were talking about the Sisters meeting. At the 4 other Book club
Meeting Briana Waters was not there correct?

L Yes

D Did you have a nickname in this group?

L I may have had one or two; the only one I remember is Reba.

D Was there a meeting where you chose an ailment name?

L There was a meeting where Jen Kolar handed out PGP disks at Santa where
everyone had an ailment name. Is that some sort of joke?

L If it was a joke I didn’t get it.

D To conceal names?

L Yes, PGP was at the point of security

D Which meeting?

L At Santa Cruz 2000

D Who was there?

L Self, Stan, Jen, Chelsea, Diana Robin, Jeff, Nathan, Joyanna, Leroy
(from Santa Cruz), Rod and Avalon. Those are the names I remember were
there.

D discussion about security that one person should not get a cell phone
for another in the group?

L I don’t recall that rule.

D But it would be a ridiculous breach of security?

L It depends on circumstances; it would be if person was trying to recruit
you for Arson.

D What if I was your Friend and had credit problems?

L I wouldn’t buy a phone for anyone. “Neither a lender or borrower be” A
piece of advice Stan gave me and it works well in prison.

D And Stan is a good source of advice?

L I am engaged to him, yes

D During the time after 9/11, you said you remorse since arson

L 9/11 made a very big impression on me and I began rethinking my
involvement w/ radicalism

D Stan committed arson after 9/11 in CA

L I had no knowledge of it. I read about it in the court papers

D (Susanville) Do you believe it now?

L Yes he has been Convicted

D one month after 9/11

L I have no basis to verify it

D Did you read about it when it happened?

L I'm not sure how I came to know about it.

D didn’t you read that ELF had taken credit for Susanville?

L yes

D And you never discussed it with Stan Meyerhoff?

L No, I made it known it was stupid to be involved. My relationship with
Stan was a deprogramming from serious ideological bent. I did not want to
relive events. The opportunity to talk about it now is cathartic and
penitential.

D How long have you and Stan been together?

L seven years

D and you Never talked about that Action?

L No –He has been involved in much arson and we were trying to move on in
our lives

D The Susanville event was 4 years 2 months before his arrest. You never
once discussed incident w/ the man you would marry?

L Reiterates that there was only general discussion after 9/11. She
thought it was stupid to be involved. I was surprised Susanville happened
because I thought everyone would have the same misgivings as I had

D but at the meeting in Sisters OR you all were high fiving

L No, it was a tense meeting about the communiqué. We had differences of
opinion about the content.

D but you were proud? Pleased with yourself?

L It took me a long time to renounce it

D you are a good debater aren’t you?

L trying to be careful with words because important

D But you’re a good debater

L I haven’t debated since 18 years old. I debated in high school and into
my first year of college. I had to stop in college because I was too busy
with school and my part time job.

D Before you decided to show remorse, two and a half months went by. It
was about saving yourself.

L My motivations were complex. Did not want to put my family through trial
based on a lie

D you are guilty?

L Yes

D Before, You claimed you met Brianna at Denny’s. Was she involved in Your
Motivations?

L Not to my knowledge. The only way I knew her was because she
participated in this arson.

D You met Justin Solondz in the previous year

L yes, a matter of hours-Dusty

D and you had been together in Cabin?

L is that unusual for a man and a woman to be in a residence together? I
don’t think it is. In EF! Community it is not unusual to sleep in same
space camping out or crashed on the floor. I never had sex with him. I
never thought of it.

D Remember bill Clinton and what he said?

L I never gave him a blow job if that’s what you’re saying.

Prosecution- Objection!

Judge- Move on

D what is Oregon Tilthe? You worked there

L It’s one of three main influences of straightening me out

D you were working at OR Tilthe at time you did arson

L Yes, to my great shame I dishonored my employer

D Do you feel bad about being here?

L Yes

D You don’t like Briana Waters because she told you who you are

L I have no ill willed. I feel sympathy for her and for Justin Solondz who
has fled

D Have you seen Watch?

L Heard her talk about it

D When did she tell you off?

L One of the two weekends working on UW arson

D So she had it wrong about sex with Justin Solondz

L If she believes it, I had not known she believed it.

D She didn’t accuse you?

L It’s not a clear memory. I have not remembered it until today.
D But it has come up and you have denied it.
L I don’t know how this is relevant to Briana and the arson. It’s crazy to
be raked over the coals about being an unprincipled slut.

D The reason is because you did not answer the question yesterday “do you
bear ill will towards Briana Waters?”

L I bear no Ill will to anyone, to prosecutors, Briana Waters, former
friends who have turned their backs on me.

D Do you know that people turn their backs when you inform and especially
when you lie? You know that don’t you?

L No, I have no first hand experience.

D And then you went to XXX?

L yes

D Was Stan Meyerhoff there?

L Yes He drove the Van

D was it JS’s Vehicle?

L Don’t think so. Don’t remember he had a van.

D Did you come to know that at the Susanville arson one of the
participants was Joe Dibee?

L I have read that in court papers

D One of the Vehicles taken to site was JS’s vehicle!

L I have not taken note

D Did you know that SM drove his own silver Acura to arson?

L No I didn’t know

D Did you know that William Rodgers drove his own truck to Vail arson?

Prosecution: OBJECTION she has no knowledge

D You have indicated sometimes not being able to find an anonymous car for
an action is a deal breaker. These examples show how difficult it is. So
what you do is use your own cars?

L Sir, I was only involved in one arson.

D When the rental car was leaving the scene of U of Washington arson; you
said the impact of the car accident was huge?

L in my enervated state, it felt huge

D What do you mean?>

L Leaving scene of crime any accident felt huge.

D how fast was the car traveling?

L 5 MPH

D A bit slow for a get away…

L they were crowded residential streets

D Were your head lights on?

L I assume so

D What part of vehicle was hit?

L the rear driver side door panel

D did you see it?

L later on

D where was the car when you exit the car?

L I have no distinct memory

D When did you exit the vehicle?

L I have no distinct memory.

Who was in the car?

L I have no distinct memory

D who was in the car when you entered it?

L Justin, Bill Rodgers, Jen Kolar, Briana Waters, and myself. It was a
car not a van

D why did Jen Kolar say it was a van?

L Perhaps she was involved in multiple arsons. I have no independent
knowledge of what she saw.

D What is ELAW?

L It’s a conference in U of Oregon law school. A public conference

D you attended?

L yes

D in 2000?

L yes

D on a panel you were a speaker?

L I was on multiple ones one year, maybe that year

D Do you remember saying at a panel nonviolence is being used to limit the
movement?

L I don’t recall

D Do you remember saying Nonviolence is not the way to change?

L No

D do you remember talking about the culture of non violence?

L Yes, I referenced an article

D Did you believe there was a culture of nonviolence.

L No

D Did you tell the panel that property destruction was an available tactic?

L Yes

D Did you say that we shouldn’t let the fear of jail deter us?

L I don’t Recall

D Did you say it’s not important to reach out to middle class white people?

L I don’t believe I would said that.

D Do you remember saying we must combine night time sabotage with daytime
actions?

L Yes

D What kind of night sabotage?

L Road blocks, Property destruction…

D Arson?

L No, I never wanted to be involved in arson until I did it. Do you want
to know why I did it?

D Was it because SM wanted you to?

L NO

D David Carr- a mentor- columnist for the New York Times. You two met in
San Francisco Conference for alternative journalists?

L Yes

D You told him you would cooperate (with the feds)?

L I told him I was in legal trouble

D You told him you had not cooperated (with the feds)?

L no

D He was a friend?

L We had a formal relationship because he is a more accomplished
journalist but yes I felt
friendly towards him.

D You told him you didn’t tell Feds anything they didn’t already know?

L I don’t recall

D You told him because you were romantically involved made you transgress
morals?

L Don’t recall, I told him I was in legal trouble. (To Bloom) Can I see
you note to improve my memory?

D ex. A190 2pg doc. To refresh witnesses recollection
Does that refresh you recollection?

L It’s clearly David’s perspective of the conversation we had

D Did you tell David you had not cooperated?

L I didn’t have reason to lie, it was probably before I talked to the
feds. David believed he was talking to my attorney. It appears your
investigator misrepresented himself to David

D How do you know?

L David wrote me a letter saying my attorney threatened to subpoena him
and was unhappy at it.
D I have a copy?
L Yes
D In your belongings at Seatac?
L I feel like you harassed a prominent person who knows me. I don’t want
to drag his name into it.
D Who ever he thought he was talking to- Did you say you had not
cooperated? Don’t know that you had been accused but never told the feds
anything they didn’t already know? (in phone conversation)
L I don’t know. I confessed to a prominent person I knew I had been
involved to apologize and find out where I stood with him. I don’t recall
saying… and have already said so three times.
D Did you send emails to Brian Baker?
L Yes
D Hoping he would write a letter?
L He wrote a letter to the Judge Burgess.
D One of the things you told him was “I have not betrayed anyone.” L I
don’t know.
D Did you write to Jeff Hogg by email?
L Yes
D Told him you didn’t betray anyone?
L I thought the truth was coming out and that it was not betrayal to tell
them what they knew and Jen Kolar didn’t finger me. I confessed b/c of a
guilty conscious.
D Did you tell them what you thought they knew?
L (emphatically) No. I told them what I knew. I thought they knew already.
I was wrong.
D Did you tell them what you thought they knew?
L I thought they knew what happened. I told them what I knew. You’re
wording it strangely.
D You were in the FBI’s office, in conference. Your attorney was there and
his assistant was woman. Mr. Friedman was there.
L Yes
D Mr. Bartlett?
L Yes
D Hawla?
L Yes
D Agent Torres?
L Yes
D Anyone else?
L I think that was all.
D And there came a time you decided you would give info.
L Sealed the deal when Lauren told me CG and SS were talking.
D You and your father met Lauren in Seattle at an anarchist café?
L A different name. I didn’t know it was anarchist. Lauren told me they
were cooperating and we talked about the 924C use of incendiary device and
if there was a way around it.
D Had you discussed it previously?
L Not sure.
D The case in general?
L Yes
D She had information because she was involved as an attorney?
L Involved, not sure of capacity.
D You and Lauren Regan had a conversation when you asked her if BW came
up. L I don’t recall.
D Trolling for a way out of predicament?
L No to understand parameters.
D Was it explained that you had to come up with a name they didn’t already
have?
L No and it was not the case.
D Did they ask you if you knew where JS was?
L Yes, probably.
D He is a fugitive, not arrested. They wanted your help.
L Yes if I had info. They didn’t ask about him until I named him.
D Then they asked where he is- New info?
L Yes, they wanted to know where he was.
D Was there a time you took a walk along River with Lauren Regan and asked
if in discovery did BW's name come up?
L I don’t remember asking her that. I think I probably would have been
reluctant to say Briana’s name. I might have asked though.
D The day you went to Feds, February 21, did they ask what happened at UW
arson?
L No. They asked my name, background, and some general info, and I
confessed. D And you didn’t know until that day what you would do?
L No
D You were scared of prison?
L Yes
D and you made a decision to save yourself.
L mmhmm. (affirmative noise)
D Express remorse previously?
L Yes to parents.
D To Stan.
L He was in jail limited communication. I saw him once.
D Did you have a phone conversation?
L Yes, starting on Christmas.
D But everything was monitored and you didn’t want to incriminate self? L
Yes
D When did you learn he cooperated? Two hours after arrest?
L I strongly suspected the next day. He said something fatalistic. Then I
knew when he said, “I betrayed everyone,” that he was cooperating. D Then
you wrote to JH saying I didn’t betray anyone?
L No, recall.
D What do you mean?
L No one was going to prison b/c of me, is what I would have meant. I
believed and I was wrong that I didn’t give them names they already know.
I fingered myself. I am not privy to what they knew.
D So you knew someone had given your name.
L I assumed Jen Kolar gave it.
D But Stan M told you he gave it.
L Yes, I knew they had my name.

After Break

D What did you tell the feds on the first day? Did you tell them about the
UW arson?
L Yes, I volunteered the information.
D Did they ask about it?
L I think I brought it up w/out being asked.
D Did you first tell them about the five book club meetings?
L I told them, not sure in which order.
D Did you tell them about dropped off at Denny’s or Perkins?
L Yes
D You weren’t clear on which.
L Yes. Now I am clear- have been back to the Denny’s.
D Did you tell them Connor and Briana Waters had recently broken up? L Yes
D You volunteered the information when the name Connor came up.
L Don’t know. Probably described Briana Waters as his recent ex
girlfriend. D Was Jen Kolar at Denny’s?
L Not sure?
D The arson was not planned at Dennys?
L No, not while I was there.
D Did you leave the table and go to the bathroom?
L Don’t recall
D And then went somewhere had a discussion?
L No memory of it.
D Day of the week?
L Believe Friday or Saturday. A week prior to the arson.
D You don’t recall Jen Kolar there?
L Unsure, I think she may have been. I don’t remember where we went or if
there was a meeting. Only being on track the next morning.
D Next morning Saturday or Sunday? Which?
L Not certain.
D Was there a meeting after you were on track?
L Yes, we met in a field and there were myself, Jen Kolar, Briana Water,
Justin Solondz and Avalon.
D How did you get there?
L Can’t answer.
D How long did it take?
L I don’t know. I remember Jen described breaking the window, I asked we
not use the term ELF, and we agreed not to cooperate.
D Where there other meetings?
L We met at The Evergreen State College (TESC).
D Did you discuss arson?
L Yes
D In a room?
L We went into a building through a labyrinth as a computer lab. I
remember it was off of a computer lab.
D A locked room?
L No recollection?
D Were there a lot of students?
L Yes there at TESC
D Could they have walked in?
L They could have.
D Was Jen Kolar there?
L Yes
D Was anyone afraid of having someone walk in?
L That would have been a concern. It was consistent with security culture,
an unassociated room that was bug free. Briana Waters and Justin Solondz
seemed familiar with the room and they were both there.
D Then what?
L Driving back to Eugene in Stan’s car.
D How did you meet with Stan?
L No recollection
D Did he pick you up at TESC?
L Possibly
D You wound up in his car and drove to Eugene?
L Yes
D Anyone else?
L I believe Suzanne Savoie and Daniel McGowan.
D Did you talk about arson plans in the car?
L No
D Where did you go in Eugene?
L I was living in a house with Lauren Regan.
D You didn’t tell her you were planning arson, right?
L I did not tell her I was planning arson. I believe she knew I was
involved in underground activities and she was supportive of that. D Did
you conceal form her what you were about to do?
L I concealed from everyone.
D Did you deceive her?
L Deception is not a strong point. I had to learn how.
D You did not open up to anyone about it?
L No.
D Kept a secret?
L Yes
D Who was at the Evergreen State College meeting?
L Same five people.
Prosecution- Objection. Already asked why going back and forth?
Defense- I was about to ask her about…
Defense- On the 21st of February did you tell government “Diver” not there
at TESC meeting.
L I may have.
D True or untrue.
L Accurate to my recollection at the time.
D Something refreshed your memory.
L Yes. I remembered a conversation about how much fuel to use and Jen
Kolar advocated less fuel.
D But you told them “Diver” was not there.
L I believe I may have.
D So you were making it up as you went along.
L That would be a gross misrepresentation.
D You knew she was involved, and didn’t name her as being at TESC. L
Already answered.
D Was she at one meeting that weekend or more than one?
L I remember her at the meeting in the field and at the TESC.
D Did you tell government she was at one of the meetings?
L Not sure, seems accurate.
D Next weekend, with whom you drove from Eugene to Olympia?
L Same four, Stan Meyerhoff, Suzanne Savoie, Daniel McGowan and myself. D
Which way is Olympia?
L North.
D How long is the trip?
L Four to five hours.
D And you know where Clatskanie is?
L I did, I don’t know now.
D Is it south of Olympia?
L Yes, in Oregon.
D You say the people you drove up with, were they involved in Clatskanie?
L Stan Meyerhoff, Susan Sevoie, Daniel McGowan, Nathan Block, Joyanna
Zacher are the people I thought were involved and have plead guilty. D On
the weekend of the arson were they with you?
L Yes, either Saturday or Sunday of that weekend. I think it was Sunday. D
So on Sunday you drove up. What time?
L Don’t know.
D Was it light or dark?
L Don’t know.
D Where did you go?
L To Olympia.
D What part?
L Don’t know?
Prosecution Objection has been answered.
D And did there come a time when you saw SM assisting construction of
incendiary devices?
L No. I didn’t see him.
D Did you see Conner doing so.
L I didn’t witness any incendiary devices until I was taken into the clean
room.
D Was SM there?
L Possibly. The memory is hazy.
D He was your boyfriend?
L Not yet at that time.
D Were you flirting with SM?
L Yes. If I saw him it was walking from right across fenced opening to
outbuilding.
D Was it light out?
L I think so. If I saw that I was not supposed to so I put it out of my
mind. D The two actions were supposed to be separate.
L I knew there would be another action but didn’t know it was an arson. D
What is a clean room?
L Free of DNA, hair, etc.
D Is it based on the manual by SM and Avalon, clean rooms should be
associated with person not involved in arson.
L I can’t speak to the manual.
D Was there discussion?
L Yes maybe at Santa Cruz.
D And it is supposed to be an unrelated person? This is inconsistent with
the never being associated with the participant.
L I don’t remember.
D It was Briana’s house? Her living space was in that garage?
L Not at that point, there was no bed.
D The house was owned by Ocean?
L I knew the house was associated with someone named Ocean.
D He was not living there, you knew?
L I didn’t know. Maybe waiting for the wheel chair ramp to be built? D You
knew he was in a wheelchair?
L I know now.
D There were workers at the house building a ramp, did you see them? L I
kind of have a memory of a ramp under construction but it was the weekend
so there were no workers.
D No one was living in the main house because of construction.
L I didn’t know. The clean room was in the garage. Briana did not live in
the garage at that time.
D How do you know?
L There was no bed.
D Did you see it all?
L I think so.
D What was chosen as a clean room was associated with the participants, as
contrary to the manual? They decided it was ok to risk DNA on the devices?
Let’s say she was not living there but associated with the house.
L First, I don’t think Stan had a very big role in the writing of the
manual. Second, I didn’t read it. Third, we did not work in accordance
with Avalon’s manual.
D How about 36 hour car rule?
L I never heard the rule.
Break

D Did you tell them Briana and Conner were both lookouts.
L No I don’t think so.
D Recollection of memory. Exhibit A191 to help Lacey refresh her memory.
Document A113- which is one page from A191. Highlighted portion of her
notes.

L- Her notes are not to be taken as her word.
D- Are you saying you got it wrong?
L She remembers JS driving. They pushed me to remember if he was in
building or lookout. Not sure if he stayed in the car or was lookout but
pretty sure not at the building. I don’t have a clear memory.
D The position is that there was one lookout and it was Briana Waters. L
Yes, no clear memory otherwise.
D Did you have appointment to meet the rest?
L I don’t know.
D You met her at a restaurant.
L We met at the Green Lake Bar.
D Was it prearranged to meet Jen Kolar?
L Not sure. No clear recollection of how I got to Seattle before afternoon
or evening before the arson.
D you drove up from Olympia and with you were BW, JS, and Avalon.
L It’s in the report. But I don’t know how I got to Seattle. Maybe I drove
with JK.
D What time was the arson?
L After dark maybe 11-12.
D Did you come up from Olympia or Eugene?
L Probably Olympia not certain. I can’t testify to that.
D When did you go to Olympia?
L On Sunday, May 20th with SS, SM, DM and self.
D Where in Olympia did you go? The place where the clean room was? L May
have been that I went to the clean room that weekend. Not sure which
weekend the device was built. I don’t know when or how I saw it.
D Do you think it was the weekend of the arson? Was SM in the vicinity? L
If so, I didn’t know.
D Did they drop you off or did they stay?
L No recollection of SS or DM interacting with UW people except myself and
Stan.
D Did you tell authorities SM may have been involved in building devices?
L May have, not sure. I generally understand SM, JS and Avalon were in
charge of devices.
D Did you tell the feds on 2/21/ 06 that SM and Conner were rushing to
finish devices.
L That’s consistent with my memory.
D Is it b/c Stan had to take some devices to Oregon?
L I have no knowledge of that.
D Did you know at the time it was a joint action?
L I didn’t know it was a joint arson. If the government wrote that it was
wrong b/c I knew they were going to another crime. I had no knowledge of
where.
D Were you surprised by Clatskanie.
L Yes.
D A week later you talked about it at Sisters, OR?
L Yes.
D Did you see Conner and SM put together devices in Olympia.
L I never saw them.
D Stan didn’t tell authorities?
L I understood, not saw. It’s necessary to be particular.
Evidence A115 and A192-
D- Does the document refresh your memory? Recall whether or not you told
authorities SM and Conner were rushing to finish devices?
L These are notes of my words but I don’t like how it is written.
(summarized)
D What would be the basis of knowledge that they were rushing to finish
the devices?
L Not sure.
D Fair to say 4-5 hour drive to Clatskanie, OR?
L Not sure.
D What time of day did you observe?
L I don’t know.
D Once devices were finished was there gasoline in the area of the clean
room.
L I don’t remember.
D Do you know when the gasoline was procured.
L I don’t remember seeing in the clean room.
D When gasoline for the devices introduced?
L I believe Conner acquired the gas.
D Why?
L Don’t know, I can’t say.
D Do you know when?
L I don’t know.
D Do you know from where?
L I don’t know.
D Did you drive in the vehicle from Olympia to Seattle?
L Yes.
D Did you notice the gas in the vehicle when you drove up?
L I don’t recall.
D How long did it take to drive to Seattle?
L I don’t know. I think the drive is an hour or so.
D Do you remember a lot of traffic?
L My only memory is the time with Jen Kolar in the evening.
D Did you talk about Briana Waters?
L We may have talked about this issue, does Briana hate me b/c she thinks
I slept with her boyfriend.
D Did you meet BW at the restaurant?
L We were at a restaurant.
D She could have been in the car?
L Possibly.
D Was she picked up at the airport or somewhere?
L Pretty sure no.
D Before the restaurant did you stop somewhere?
L No memory of that.
D Do you remember any dumpsters anytime that night?
L I recall walking past dumpsters on the way to the site.
D Do you recall anyone dropping off the gas and devices?
L I recall JS placed them there earlier in the evening.
D Was he with you?
L No.
D Where did you go in Seattle?
L The bar.
D Where did you go first before?
L Don’t know.
D Did you stop at a home to pick anything up?
L It’s possible. There was a thing of dropping off of a car by an
overpass. D Do you remember getting it next morning?
L Not sure.
D What kind of car?
L I don’t know.
D Whose car?
L I don’t know.
D Was it JK car?
L I don’t know.
D The five of you were at the bar?
L Yes.
D What time was it?
L Early evening or afternoon. The bar was open and we ate dinnerish type
food.
D This is a meeting of five people going out to commit arson at UW. L Yes,
a meet up.
D And you don’t recall.
L I believe Briana was there. I’m certain Briana was there. I’m very clear
without a doubt. I don’t a continuous memory of sequence of events. D. If
you don’t say Briana Waters was there, you will go to prison for 35 years.
L I believe if I had a bad memory, they have no interest in convicting
someone who wasn’t there. I believe this is being framed as a political
investigation. This has not been my experience. That is what has made it
easy to cooperate.
D Our pleadings address certain factual issues that relate to that type of
claim. There has been a ruling by the court you can’t go into certain
things. Regarding your statement.
L They don’t want to convict innocent people. Have you read into our
pleadings about what agents have done?
L (won’t answer)
D Moves back to arson
WR was at the window at Bradshaw’s office. Avalon was by a big window.
Avalon handed her some documents. You testified there were no documents. L
I don’t know.
D About renting a car, did you tell the government that BW Aunt did it? L
Yes.
D Involvement in WTO Seattle events. Testified what you ere involved in
was making sleeping arrangements- what else?
L Outreach, research on company, sponsors, etc.
D Involved in throwing bricks?
L No, did not break windows.
D Did you spray paint?
L I don’t remember
D Did you know Tim Lewis?
L Yes
D You had collected bricks?
L I don’t recall.
D Do you remember running through the streets in black clothes?
L Yes
D Do you remember exhilaration?
L Sounds like you are quoting me from Lewis’ video. I was in it
reluctantly. I was careful with my words to not implicate myself. I was
talking about an event in England. I tried to clarify about it with Lewis
that he may cut it. It led to a falling out.
D But it was in context of what you felt in Seattle. Exhilarated as you
expressed in Sisters after the arson?
L Yes.
D Did you participate in events at Oak Ridge or Detroit Ranger Station? L Yes
D Spread manure and glued locks?
L Other people glued locks and spread compost.
D You knew working people would clean it up.
D I was a thoughtless radical. I didn’t think about it.
D You did not consider consequences of people who would clean up after
you. L Correct.
D Avalon was involved in all kinds of levels.
L Can I clarify it was a long progression from dumping manure, digging
road blockades to arson. I was a radical. I admit it.
D Avalon saw a development in his actions from legal in focus to
obsessively clandestine.
L He may have been involved in the clandestine and above ground but I
didn’t know it.
D There is a range of tactics in Northwest, even in Tacoma. Watch
generated a lot of discussion about that type of action (organizing). L
Only way Watch is in my mind is b/c it is associated with hearing about
it. D Briana was at ELAW. Kim Marks sat on the same panel as you and
talked about Watch and organizing the working class.
L Being arrogant, I don’t remember what person I was and what other people
said on the panel.
D Did you know Briana Waters was involved in TESC animal rights group.
Bringing speakers, bake sale.
L Now I know that.
D No more questions.

Prosecution
Exhibit 612 Some radical literature from newsletter from ELP support
network. 2 copies of 1 item 2002 spring.
Prosecution: Look at back corner. Contact information for whom?
Lacey: Briana number for lacey and something indicated as VM for India
(SS). P Is it your handwriting?
L I don’t think so.
P Were you together with other people in the spring of 2002 when pamphlet
is dated? I don’t think so.

Prosecution- Government calls Megan Ropp. Avis Budget group, special
investigations to handle insurance claims.

Prosecution requested information from March 24 2006 on. There was
continued contact. Searching for cars that might have been damaged.
Exhibit 771. Avis rental information for a Kara Denis Larsen and proceeds
with the details of the rentail car. May 19- May22. Not listed for unit #
and vin #. Went through the total amount of money.

Cross exam
Defense- Tax documentation for additional driver.
Megan Ropp- Yes.
Defense- No damage or nothing unusual recorded.
Megan- Correct.

Until Tuesday.
Defense want to submit segments of video. 15 to 18 minutes of Watch. A
segment of Lacey in (Reconstruction?) and a segment of Kim Marks.

US states segment about Lacey is not relevant to the case and therefore it
is not admissible.

***

NOTES FROM FEBRUARY 19

US v. Briana Waters, February 19, 2008 Trial Court Notes
8:30am—pretrial matters discussed outside the view of the jury. Defense
argued that they should be able to question Briana Waters’ (BW) cousin,
Robert Corrina regarding a phone call Briana made to him prior to being
contacted by the FBI. The rule of completeness allows for defense to
bring out that Briana told him to be honest, and the fact that he lied to
the grand jury was not at BW’s behest. Court denied motion.

9:07 am Court convenes, jury of 14 enters courtroom. Judge: Franklin
Burgess. Defense: BW, Bob Bloom (BB), Neil Fox (NF). Feds: Andrew
Friedman (AF), Mark Bartlett (MB), Agent Halla.

Government calls Sarah Reichard
University of Washington (UW) botany research professor at time of fire,
5/21/01. Office and lab at UW Center for Urban Horticulture (CUH). Her
equipment, research and work were impacted or destroyed by the fire. She
indicated during the summer of 2001 she suffered from depression, thought
the Safeway store was full of ELF people and caused her to run from the
store (they were just UW students); and freaked out on a Greenpeace
canvasser who came to her door.

Cross examination by NF
NF indicated it sounded like she was quite traumatized by the fire, and
asked her if that was true, she said yes. He then said, “I’m sorry.” (NF
has apologized in this manner to many witnesses thus far as his client had
nothing to do with the fire and it’s clear the fire impacted many people).
As Ms. Reichard was leaving the stand after his apology, she seemed
confused and was muttering. Defense moved to strike any statements she
made in front of the jury, if any were audible.

9:47am
Government calls Tiffany Tudder
Evergreen College student with BW. Graduated in 2001 in film. Also
member of Evergreen Animal Rights Network (EARN) and friend with BW. Knew
Justin Solondz (JS) as BW’s boyfriend. Fall 2001 EARN invited Craig
Rosebraugh to lecture for a half-hour. NYT reporter interviewed her and
was published in an article in 1998 (Pltfs Ex. 740-C, NYT article). The
reporter asks her whether they agreed with arsons and mink releases. BW
is “quoted” as saying ‘as long as it doesn’t hurt people’ and Tudder is
quoted as adding ‘and animals too.’ She recalls the article as being
accurate.

Cross examination by BB
BB asks her if she remembers the actual questions or answers that were
given almost 10 years ago. She says no, she doesn’t remember the actual
words used. Needs copy of article in front of her to refresh her memory.
BB asks her if BW ever expressed a desire to burn buildings, she answers
No. She agrees that BW is not extreme, is mellow, honest, rational, level
headed, nice person. She testifies that EARN brought speakers to campus,
had bake sales and potlucks, and was legal campus group. Testified that
the campus is open, nothing is locked that she knew of. Lots of woodlands
around campus. In response to BB question, she indicates it would be
risky to have a clandestine meeting in a campus room b/c anyone could come
in during it.

10am
Government calls Toby Bradshaw
University of Washington (UW) College of Forest Resources professor at
time of fire, 5/21/01. Ecology, genetics, and forest related topics—denies
doing genetic engineering research on trees, says he only does tree
breeding (GE of trees ‘is not objectionable, it’s just not my work’).
Founder of Poplar Molecular Genetics Cooperative (PMGC) in 1995—timber
industries pay to be members which supports research for corporations that
profit from forestry/timber. Boise, Pacific Alberta, Weyerhauser, Potlach
and many others are members. He provides them with ‘fruits of research’
on how organisms adapt to the environment. 15,000 trees bred, gives
cutting and seeds to member timber corporations for commercial use. Had
prior damage done to trees in 1999, saw communiqué on web referencing the
PMGC and the dangers of genetic engineering. Testified that he has
browsed the Internet looking for groups targeting him and/or his research.

MORNING BREAK
10:55am
Office and lab at UW Center for Urban Horticulture (CUH). Occurred to him
that he might be the target of the arson as he drove to UW upon learning
of fire at 6:30am. His equipment, research and work were impacted or
destroyed by water and smoke damage, not fire. [Strange tangent: Bradshaw
testified that one of the first things he saw near a tree outside his
office were his snake boxes. He keeps snakes to show hybridization of
snake varieties in class, though he didn’t have any in his office at the
time of the arson. He knew the ELF spared animals and so he pieced it
together, and made the assumption that ELF has purposefully brought the
empty snake box out of the building without opening it to see if snakes
were actually in it.] Bradshaw used the term “firebomb” several times and
came across as a friendly good-natured professor.

Cross examination by BB
Bob asks him to affirm that the fire was a horrible experience and caused
the suffering of staff, he does so. BB asks if he knew that Lacey
Phillabaum and Jennifer Kolar have admitted to the planning and burning of
the CUH, says yes. BB asks if he is aware that BW had denied guilt and
has demanded a trial because she asserts her innocence, he says yes. BB
asks whether Bradshaw questions the morality and self-interest of LP and
JK? FEDS OBJECT. JUDGE SUSTAINS.

11:05am
Government calls Tom Hinckley
University of Washington (UW) College of Forest Resources professor since
1980, Director of CUH at time of fire, 5/21/01. His office was on 2nd
floor of CUH, lab elsewhere. Learned of fire at 6am, knew it didn’t look
like a normal lab fire. Later that afternoon he walked through building
w/ firefighter to assess damage. Most labs, offices, equipment, research
destroyed. “Only” 12% of books in CUH library destroyed thanks to
superhuman effort to save books. He was responsible for orchestrating
post-fire rebuilding and reorganization and therefore had to stop teaching
and researching to devote time to his director duties. June 2004 he
stepped down as director; Dec. 2004 new CUH building opened.

11:40am
NO CROSS, witness excused.

11:42am
Government calls Gary Quarforth
University of Washington (UW) associate vice provost -- planning and
budgeting, one of the central finance offices. Big research university
and lots of auxiliary businesses. In 2001 UW had $2 billion operating
budget. Discusses a bunch of financial stuff, costs of rebuilding, etc.
They ended up spending double the amount of money on the new CUH than the
former building was worth (cost $8M, old was worth $4M).

NO CROSS, witness excused.

NOON RECESS, COURT ADJOURNED.

1:05pm
Government calls David Gratzer
2001 worked at Budget Rental Co., Olympia branch manager. Rental agreement
(Pltfs 771) indicates car was returned between 6pm and 6:30am while store
was closed.

NO CROSS, witness excused.

Government reads a stipulation to the jury regarding 2 photographs of a
Toyota camry & VIN number (Pltfs 775, 776). Shown to jury.

1:22pm
Government calls Robert Corrina (RC)
Cousin of BW, married Kara Larson, had son in Olympia, WA 1998. Lived
with BW when they first moved to Oly, then rented duplex for his family.
BW stayed with them for about 6 mos on and off. He testified that one
evening BW asked ‘us to go out to dinner and not come back until a certain
time.’ When he returned to the house, a meeting was ending, and he saw
William Rodgers at his house. BW also lived with boyfriend Justin and
stayed with Ocean and his family, while BW’s stuff remained in Corrina’s
basement. RC was shown his family calendar from 5/01. RC receives phone
call from BW asking to rent a car week of 5/14 to move her belongings, she
says she’ll pay for part of it (RC has no driver’s license or car, BW has
no car). Kara’s i.d. and credit card are used to rent car. He says Kara
and BW returned from picking up the rental car together, rented from
5/19/01 (sat) to 5/21/01 (mon). He testified, for the first time, that on
5/20 BW was at his house in the afternoon and began complaining of
abdominal pain and said she needed to go to the emergency room. She
wanted to be driven there by Justin who was nearby but didn’t have his
car. Justin appeared at house on foot and they drove off in the rental
car late afternoon/evening. The handset from RC’s portable phone was
missing from the house. BW didn’t come home until next day and apologized
for inadvertently taking the phone. He states she told him that she went
to Seattle ER b/c couldn’t gain access to Oly ER, and then she went to her
room in the basement and slept. RC and Kara dropped car off at Budget.
He says BW asked him to look at the car for damage, and he didn’t see any.
Feds show his wife’s discover card statement and Key Bank records for
5/01.

RC has been interviewed many times by FBI. When FBI first went to his
house and showed him picture of BW, he said he didn’t know her. Said “I
thought I could protect her and make them go away.” 5/06 revisited by
FBI, now says he knew BW but had not rented a car. Subpoenaed to grand
jury, again testified BW was his cousin but had not rented a car and did
not know of BW renting a car, said he did not remember. FBI then
contacted Kara at work at state office Jan. 07. Rental car documents were
shown to her at this time. Hired an attorney who arranged a meeting with
FBI “to explain” why he had perjured himself earlier. Says his testimony
today was stressful and causing problems with his extended family.

2:05pm Jury leaves and court takes up motion by defense re: BW statement
to RC “tell the truth.” Judge rules statement is hearsay.

2:10
Cross examination by BB
RC refused to speak with defense/Bob despite numerous requests before
trial. BB: “You lied to a federal agent and now the feds hold your life
in their hands right?” RC says “not true.” BB: “Aware lying to a federal
agent is a felony?” “Jan. 07 FBI goes to Kara’s work and threatened her
and him with perjury or going to prison?” RC squirms over threat of
perjury against them. Friedman (prosecutor) yelled at her at her work.
Got an atty shortly thereafter but said not b/c they were scared, but b/c
it was a legal matter. BB points out that RC was testifying in great
detail about events that occurred 7 years ago, but seems to have selective
memory about things that happened less than 2 years ago. [This is when it
started to appear that RC was lying]. BB asks about an event, RC says
Fall 06, doesn’t recall the month. When asked why he can recall a
particular day of the week from 7 yrs ago, RC says, “I pieced those dates
together from documents I was shown, not because I remembered them. BB:
“Did BW ever ask you to lie for her?” RC: “No.” RC made decision to lie
to protect her. Documents were shown to him establishing he had lied to
FBI multiple times.

AFTERNOON RECESS
Cross continues
2:55pm
BB goes through history and incidents of prior perjury, gets RC to admit
he said things to the feds and that they were correct statements.
[reminder arson 5/21/01]
1. contacted by BW by phone and told FBI might be contacting him and that
he should just tell the truth.
2. 5/16/05 FBI visit at his house, RC shown picture of BW, denies knowing
her.
3. 10/3/06 FBI visit, admits knows BW, denies car rental
4. 10/25/06 grand jury testimony, admits knowing BW, denies anything to do
w/ car rental, gives reasons why he would not have rented a car.
5. 1/19/07 FBI and US Atty show up at Kara’s work, yell and threaten her.
6. RC and Kara hire an attorney (Zooloff)
7. 2/1/07 RC, Kara and atty go to Seattle to meet with feds. Thought they
were in some trouble. [Clear his testimony today is coerced from feds
based on threats of federal crimes such as perjury to grand jury,
obstruction of justice and lying to federal officials and the ole taking
parents away from child type of fear].

Court adjourns with BB still in cross of RC.

TOMORROW will be continuation of BB cross of RC, and maybe redirect by
feds. Then Jennifer Kolar and Heather Moore will be take the stand.

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Briana Waters Trial : UPDATE JENN KOLAR MIGHT go on today or early tomorrow

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2008/02/372431.shtml

Jenn Kolar might take the stand today or tomorrow, she is a Federal
informant If you can come to federal court in Tacoma, Washington both
today, between now and 4pm or tomorrow, please do so and spread
the word. You will need picture id, no laptops, food, etc., and PLEASE
dress appropriately for court or don't come anywhere near the courthouse
(this is a jury trial).

As was brought up in opening statements by the Defense on Tuesday, much of
the evidence that the prosecution's case is relies upon is based on the
mutually contradictory testimony of Lacey Phillabaum and Jennifer Kolar,
the two key government witnesses against Ms. Waters. The questioning and
cross-examining of these key witnesses are likely to be some of the most
pivotal of the case, and it is very important that supporters of Briana
show up to bear witness.

Basically, If you are coming from far away, we are suggesting people spend
the night here in Tacoma. If you need housing, there are couches
available, and if you leave your things in a car to come into the
courthouse, you will find plenty of friendly and helpful faces that can
put you up among Briana's supporters!

Also, supporters in Olympia have organized carpools leaving daily from the
Grocery Outlet Westside parking lot, (at the corner of Harrison Ave. and
Division St.) at 7:30 AM.

The Federal Court is located at 1717 Pacific Ave in Tacoma, WA and court
will begin promptly at 9:00 am.

Three Italian Anti-Fascists Jailed

Urgent ELP! Bulletin (19th February 2008)

Dear friends

ELP has just learnt that three antifa activists have been jailed in Italy. It appears that a group of far-right extremists were taking a train to attend a Lega Nord (a far right political group) demonstration. The three expressed their opposition to the police about these far-right protesters and somehow a fight broken out between the antifa activists and the police. ELP is unclear how the fight broke out.

Please send letters of support to:

Monica Natta
via Pianezza 300
10151 Torino Le Vallette (TO)
Italy

Fabio Milan
via Pianezza 300
10151 Torino Le Vallette (TO)
Italy

Luca Bonino
via Pianezza 300
10151 Torino Le Vallette (TO)
Italy

++++++++++++++++++
Earth Liberation Prisoners Support Network
BM Box 2407
London
WC1N 3XX
England

Briana Waters Trial General Announcement

from Olympia Civil Liberties Resource

Briana Waters Trial General Announcement
PLEASE REPOST AND FORWARD THIS ANNOUNCEMENT

Briana Waters' trial continues on February 19 at 9AM. Please be at the
court at 9am. Dress and act respectful of the court. US District Court of
Western Washington is at 1717 Pacific Ave, Tacoma. Judge Burgess starts on
time.

This will continue the second full week for the trial. Attendance is
encouraged, please look at indymedia to find how to dress. Dress is
important. It is important for us to continue the observation and
dissemination of the information of this trial.

Briana Waters asks that there be NO rally or signs outside or inside of
the courtroom. Our presence will be the support she needs. Please come
dressed and leave the wacky at home. Anyone concerned with civil liberties
should pay attention to this case.

Briana Waters has been indicted in the arson at the UW Center for Urban
Horticulture, specifically for the alleged role as a lookout. Ms. Waters
maintains her innocence and pleads not guilty. Briana Waters is facing a
mandatory minimum of 35 years.

The case is built on the word of two informants, Jennifer and Lacey
Phillabaum. Although, Ms. Waters attorneys, Robert Bloom and Neil Fox,
filed a motion that the government concealed important information and
created a fraudulent FBI report. The Judge Burgess has denied the motion
in January. The Judge Burgess closed the pretrial, which is our
fundamental right to an open and clear process in public court.

Now is the time that we must show up in the court room to support the
transparency of our judicial system. It is more than our civil liberties
at stake in this precedent setting case. We have seen more and more of our
civil rights taken away and it is important for us to stand and bear
witness to this trial.

Carpools are encouraged from Seattle.

Olympia Carpools leave daily from the Grocery Outlet Westside parking lot
at 7:30 AM.

More information:

Support Briana Website (www.supportbriana.org)

Olympia Civil Liberties Resource (www.olycivlib.org)

Portland Indymedia (portland.indymedia.org/en/topic/greenscare) (daily
notes from court

Monday, February 18, 2008

Feb. 23rd Teach in and Jose Perez Freedom Fund

The ProLibertad Freedom Campaign

http://www.myspace.com/ProLibertad
ProLibertad@hotmail.com
and ProlIbertad.campaign@gmail.com
ProLibertad Hotline: 718-601-4751

On January 18th, Vieques Political Prisoner Jose Perez Gonzalez finished his prison sentence and is now free!! The ProLibertad Freedom Campaign, its friends and supporters, welcomes José and shares his joy in once again sharing the warmth that comes from walking among our people and the pride we all feel for his heroic service.

But Jose still needs our support. He is facing a $10,000 dollar fine to be paid to the U.S. government. We need to help Jose Perez Gonzalez!!

We are asking all freedom-loving people to send a donation to the Jose Perez Freedom Fund to help him pay the fine!! Send any amount between $20-whatever you can to the following address:

IFCO/ProLibertad
418 W145th St.
New York, N.Y. 10031

Please endorse the check or money order to: IFCO/ProLibertad and write “Jose Perez Gonzalez Freedom Fund” in the memo section.

TEACH-IN ON GRAND JURIES, REPRESSION, AND RESISTANCE

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 23rd, 2-5 PM

St. Mary's Church

521 West 126th Street (between Amsterdam and Broadway).

Participants will include:

Ana Lopez and Youth Resisters, Hostos January 11 Grand Jury Resistance Campaign

Julio Rosado, Legendary Independentista and Grand Jury Resister

Esperanza Martell, Iglesia San Romero de las Americas

Roger Wareham, December 12th Movement

Robert Boyle, National Lawyers Guild

Bob Lederer, Grand Jury Resister/Resistance in Brooklyn

NYC Coalition members

Friends of MOVE

And others to be announced

Learn from and support the Puerto Rican Independence Movement and the young Puerto Rican cultural workers who have been served notice to appear before a Grand Jury in Brooklyn - a serious attack on the Puerto Rican Independence Movement, on the Puerto Rican community, and on all of our civil liberties. Learn how the grand jury process is part of the state's attacks on the progressive movement in this country. Learn about the history of resistance to this repression. How does this particular governmental attack on us fit into the overall picture of repression and fascistic developments?

Learn about the attacks on December 12th, the

Free Mumia Movement, the MOVE organization, and many others.

There will be extensive time for questions and role playing to helpPeople understand the grand jury process, and to strengthen our courage and ability to resist.

Sponsored by: Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition, Hostos January 11th Grand Jury Resistance Campaign, and the December 12th Movement.

DC Green Scare Benefit for Briana Waters

Escape Empire Presents:

A Benefit for Briana Waters and Food Drive for We Are Family
Sponsored by the Brian MacKenzie Infoshop

Friday, March 7th - doors 7:30 p.m. - show starts 8:15 p.m.
with:
Ghost Mice (Plan-It-X Records)
Erik Petersen (of Mischief Brew)
From the Depths (new band with members of Requiem and Catharsis)
Plus One more act to be announced!

St. Stephens Church
1525 Newton Street NW, Washington, DC 20010.

$5-10 sliding scale to benefit Briana Waters: www.supportbriana.org
Bring a canned food item, cereal or peanut butter donation for We Are Family, a local organization that serves low-income seniors in Washington,DC

Sponsored by the Brian Mackenzie Infoshop: www.dcinfoshop.org
The night before the 2008 National Conference on Organized Resistance:
www.ncor2008.org

Briana Waters is currently on trial. Please support her in whatever way you can.

Briana Waters trial: Phillabaum testifying against Briana day two 2/15

IMPORTANT: IF YOU KNOW ANY OF THESE PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE NOT BEEN TAKEN
INTO CUSTODY, PLEASE, PLEASE, DO NOT ASSIST THE FEDS IN FINDING THEM BY
TRYING TO CONTACT THEM. DO NOT TRY TO CONTACT THEM. YOU DO NOT WANT TO
BE THE ONE WHO LED THE FEDS TO ONE OF OUR FRIENDS. BE SMART.

day two lacey testifying against briana

Feb 15: Lacey was on the stand from 9am-3pm.
Lacey evaded and danced around answering questions. She did a great job
(sad to say). Very hard to pin down. Used big words, semantics and
debate techniques (reminiscent of Bill Clinton) to not directly answer
questions. Seemed to also have a conveniently selective memory. She
avoided answering the questions asked by Briana's lawyer but,
volunteered self-serving info that pinned others as leaders and framed
herself as less responsible. Full notes to follow soon.

She named the following people:

Book club mtg ELAW 2000 Eugene
Lacey
Spring
Peaches
Jeff Hogg
Rod
Avalon (Bill Rodgers)
Tumbleweed
Suzanne Savioe
Diana Robin
Vernel Lundberg
Al Decker
maybe Natahn
maybe Joy
Rupert from tucson
2 men from santa cruz


Dusty crop pull, summer 2000:
Conner (which is the name she said she called Justin Solonz)
Lacey
Chelsea Gerlach
Suzanne
Nathan
Joy
Daniel?
Stan Meyerhoff or Avalon?


Drove up from Eugene to Oly the weekend before and the weekend of the UW
arson:
Suzanne
Daniel McGowan
Stan
Lacey

Meeting in a field before May 21, 2001, UW arson (also the people she
claims participated in the UW arson):
Lacey
Jen Kolar
Briana Waters
Justin
Avalon

Book club mtg Sister (Summer 2001):
Lacey
Nathan
Joy
Chelsea
Jeff
Diana
Jennifer
Stan
Daniel

Walked up road at sisters meeting for private conversation:
(Tension about communiqué over use of ELF name and pride over mission
accomplished [UW])
Lacey
Nathan
Joy
Jennifer
Suzanne
Stan
Daniel

Book club mtg Santa Cruz (w/PGP!)
Lacey
Jen
Stan
Chelsea
Diana
Jeff
Nathan
Joy
Leroy from Santa Cruz
Rod
Avalon


She claims to not have seen Jen Kolar since the Sisters meeting. (Know
any different?) She claims to have met Justin for the first time in Oly
the weekend before the UW arson. (Know any different?)


Also named or confirmed by Lacey at different times for related reasons:
Cecelia (as Jeff's partner)
Josh Laughlin
Katie Higgins
Ocean (Wheelchair ramp being built at her house in Oly. House with
"clean room" where devices were built.)

ELP has a new contact group in Greece

ELP Information Bulletin (18th of February 2008)

Dear friends

ELP is delighted to announce we have a new ELP contact group in Greece. Their e-mail address is greekelp@yahoo.gr and they have a website http://greekelp.blogspot.com

ELP is also currently in the process of setting up contact groups in Italy and Australia. More on these later!

++++++++

British Earth Liberation Prisoners Support Network
BM Box 2407
London
WC1N 3XX
England
www.spiritoffreedom.org.uk

ELP Public Statement on Christopher 'Dirt' McIntosh

ELP Information Bulletin (17th of February 2008)

Dear Friends

Just under two weeks ago ELP announced we were suspending from our prisoner lists the American prisoner Christopher 'Dirt' McIntosh, who is currently imprisoned for a failed arson against a McDonalds restaurant. Following our investigation ELP has decided to permanently remove McIntosh from our lists and encourage others to do likewise. Our reasons for this decision are detailed below:

WARNING - The below statement contains direct quotations of some of the racist and sexist words that Christopher 'Dirt' McIntosh has written to some of his supporters. If you are offended by racist or sexist language please do not read the below statement. We do not deliberately wish to offend anyone, but we are using McIntosh's own words to demonstrate his new found politics.

On the 8th of February 2008 a well known and highly respected former ALF prisoner contacted ELP to raise his concerns about the American prisoner Christopher 'Dirt' McIntosh.

The former ALF prisoner supplied ELP with letters written by Christopher 'Dirt' McIntosh to some of his supporters. In his letters McIntosh uses highly offensive racist language and referred to black people as "fucking mud people".

In his letters McIntosh talks about white supremacy and how he would be prepared to die for white supremacy. We understand he has also talked to other supporters about his belief in white supremacy.

In addition to this McIntosh also talks about Social Darwinianism (a racist/sexist corruption of Darwin's theory of evolution) and the superiority of white people. McIntosh states "Darwinistically speaking, niggers are natural slaves, so fucking one is like fucking a cow." (ELP again understands that McIntosh has also spoken to other supporters about his belief in Social Darwinianism).

McIntosh asked one female supporter if she'd ever had sex with a black man before referring to white women who have sex with black men as "whores". McIntosh described black men who have sex with white women as "dogs".

Continuing on his sexist line, McIntosh states he has returned to eating meat and asked a female supporter if she missed eating meat. He then stated when he was a vegetarian "I suffered because I loved the taste [of meat] - But maybe my being male with different hormones and drives separates our experiences there, once again Darwinistically speaking".

Because of his racist and sexist comments ELP decided to suspend Christopher 'Dirt' McIntosh from our prisoner lists with immediate effect and publically request any other offensive material McIntosh had written. Our subsequent investigations have shown that:

1) McIntosh has adopted White Supremacist views whilst in prison. A number of people have contacted ELP saying that McIntosh has started to associate with a racist gang and has even gone as far as to get a racist 'white power' tattoo. In a letter to one of his supporters McIntosh enclosed a photo of himself and referred to his tattoo which was not visible in the photo. He told another supporter how he would show off his tattoo upon his release from prison.

2) McIntosh, through his Social Darwinian beliefs, thinks that 'might makes right', or as he puts it in one of his letters "supremacy to the strongest".

3) McIntosh has told at least one female supporter that it is okay for a man to rape a woman (under his 'might makes right' theme).

4) ELP has had it confirmed that since going into prison McIntosh has abandoned his vegetarian diet and has reverted to eating meat.

So on the grounds that McIntosh is a racist, sexist, meat eating, white supremicist, who believes it is okay for the strong to bully the weak and it is okay for a man to rape a woman, ELP is permanently ending our support for Christopher 'Dirt' McIntosh. We denounce McIntosh as a racist, sexist, fascist. We encourage all other prisoner support campaigns to remove him from their lists and we warn all our supporters against supporting this man.

Please feel free to forward this e-mail.

Earth Liberation Prisoners Support Network
BM Box 2407
London
WC1N 3XX
England
www.spiritoffreedom.org.uk

Saturday, February 16, 2008

Updated Address on Laura & Kevin

ELP Information Bulletin (16th February 2008)

Dear friends

ELP has just received the following e-mail about the two jailed American animal rights activists, Laura Lungarelli and Kevin Olliff. Although it is unclear if the charges have any connection to their animal rights protests, it is widely believed that these two were targetted by the police because of their animal rights activity.


Laura Michelle Lungarelli is booked as Maura Michlle Lungarlli
Please use her misspelled name and inmate number when you write her at :

Maura Michlle Lungarlli, booking # 1167062
Century Regional Detention Facility (CRDF)
11705 South Alameda Street
Lynwood, CA 90262

Bus. Phone: (323) 568-4500 * Watch Commander: (323) 568-4506
===========================================================
Write Kevin at:

Kevin Olliff, booking #1167029
Twin Towers Correctional Facility
450 Bauchet Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012

Bus. Phone: 213-893-5100
===========================================================
VISITING HOURS FOR LAURA
General Population
Sat. & Sun. (regular visiting): 8:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m. & 5:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
Holiday Hours:
8:00 a.m. - 3:30 p.m. & 5:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.

Legal Professionals
Mon.-Fri.: 9:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. & 2:00 p.m. - 4:30 p.m.

Last group of visitors must be checked in by 6:30 p.m.
===========================================================
VISITING HOURS FOR KEVIN
General Population
SAT & SUN
7:30 A.M. -12:45 A.M. ; 2:30 P.M. - 3:45 P.M.
MON & TUES
9:30 A.M. - 12:45 P.M. ; 2:30 P.M. - 6:00 P.M..

Legal Professionals
SAT & SUN
7:00 A.M. - 1:00 P.M. ; 2:30 P.M. - 4:00 P.M.
MON - FRI
9:00 A.M. - 1:00 P.M. ; 2:30 P.M. - 6:00 P.M.

*ALL VISITORS MUST PRESENT VALID IDENTIFICATION.
*INMATES ARE ALLOWED ONE VISIT PER DAY, TWO-PER VISITING WEEK. (Saturday - Tuesday)
*VISITORS ARE TAKEN ON A FIRST COME FIRST SERVED BASIS FOR EACH FLOOR.
*A MAXIMUM OF TWO PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED PER EACH INMATE'S VISITING SESSION.

+++++++++++++

Earth Liberation Prisoners Support Network
BM Box 2407
London
WC1N 3XX
England
www.spiritoffreedom.org.uk

Friday, February 15, 2008

Briana Waters Trial: Notes from Phillabaum's testimony 2/14

Feb.14 ’08

Court reconvenes after lunch.
Defense attorney Bloom serves subpoena to woman in court room to appear as
a witness; she is asked to leave. Later we find out that this is
Brianna’s aunt; her son is a witness for the prosecution.
Donald Sachtleven, FBI special agent bomb technician, returns to the
witness stand. Prosecutor Bartlett continues questioning him. Sachtleven
is asked to explain the workings of an incendiary device.
Defense attorney Fox cross exams about Sachtleven’s qualifications. Fox
points out that the education Sachtleven claimed to have amounted to
twelve weeks of formal training. Then Fox proceeded to point out the
misconducts of the four people who taught the trainings for this agency,
pointing out that they misrepresented evidence in courts of law, these
incidents were all documented by the inspector general. Fox inquires
about his involvement in the Oklahoma City bomb case, Unabomber case and
the world trade center case in which Sachtleven’s agency and unit were
criticized for performance. The cross examination continued to discredit
the witness and point out his “less than completely honest” work ethic.
Sachtleven stoops down.

Prosecuter Friedman calls Lacey Phillabaum to the stand. She enters
through a side door dressed in what look like khaki scrubs.
Q: Give a little history of yourself
A: Lived in Spokane until she was 18, graduated high school in ‘93,
graduated University of Oregon at Eugene in ’96, worked for EF Journal. Q:
Where on the spectrum would you place the views of the EF Journal. A: Most
radical.
Q: Do they have a motto?
A: “No compromise in defense of Mother Earth.”
Q: What did you do at the EF Journal
A: Newspaper editor from ’97-’99.
Q: Why did you leave?
A: Worn out, went traveling in Europe.
Q: Is the EF Journal in Eugene?
A: Yes
Q: Other work?
A: Odd jobs and Oregon Tilth
Q: What is Oregon Tilth?
A: Trade newspaper for organic standards, much more main stream. Editor
through February ’05. Moved to Virginia, then to D.C.
Q: Why are you wearing khaki?
A: I am in jail; I pleaded guilty to my charges, and self surrendered. Q:
Can you identify exhibit 792B
A: It is my plea agreement
Q: How many crimes were you charged with?
A: Three crimes: arson, conspiracy, and use of an incendiary device. Q:
Under the plea agreement, what have you agreed to do?
A: Tell the truth, regardless of impact. I’ll serve between three and
five years.
Q: How much time would you serve had you not cooperated?
A: For conspiracy, 0-5 years; arson, 5-20 years; use of an incendiary
device, 30 year minimum; consecutive.
Q: Why did you cooperate?
A: The truth was coming out; I had regrets and did not want to spend 30
years in jail. It has been excruciating every day ever since. I have a
lot of sympathy for everyone involved.
Q: Let’s talk about your activism. Where did that start?
A: Warner Creek in Oakridge a large campaign, road blockades and protest.
Q: Do you recall meeting any others there?
A: Bill Rogers
Q: Was he a leader?
A: He had experience and was looked to for advice.
Q: Identify exhibit 111
A: Picture of Avalon.
Q: How well did you get to know him at Warner Creek?
A: Years. I had a high trust level.
Q: Were you involved in other protests?
A: In the Redwoods and in Idaho.
Q: Were you arrested?
A: Three times
Q: Did you see Avalon at other protests/
A: Yes, over the years
Q: Describe your relationship with him.
A: I had a lot of trust in him, he facilitated meetings, he was very
reasonable.
Q: Would you consider his role leadership?
A: No, facilitator.
Q: What was your involvement at WTO?
A: Organizing, outreach, postering, and direct action.
Q: What type of direct action?
A: Cargill Grain elevator protest.
Q: What kind of protest?
A: Office occupation
Q: Were you alone?
A: No, I was with Avalon, Daniel McGowan, Joy Zacher, and Suzanne Savoie.
Q: Do you recognize exhibit 117/
A: Picture of Daniel McGowan
Q: Do you recognize exhibit 120?
A: Picture of Suzanne Savoie.
Q: Do you recognize exhibit 119?
A: Joy Zacher
Q: Were they all in this group?
A: Amongst others
Q: Did you take over Cargill?
A: No, the action didn’t work. We went downtown with other protestors. Q:
Did you perceive WTO as a success?
A: Yes, because the meetings did not lead to negotiations.
Q: Did this lead to other work?
A: Formed an affinity group with Avalon and others. We had five meetings
between March of 2000 and May of 2001. In Eugene, Arizona, California,
Washington, and Bend, Oregon.
Q: How many people were at the meetings?
A: 10-12, they got bigger as time went on.
Q: Who was there at the first meeting?
A: Myself, Avalon, Suzanne, Nathan, Joy, and Daniel.
Q: Same people at second meeting?
A: Avalon introduced new people. Chelsea was at the second meeting. At
the third meeting, Stan Meyerhoff and Jennifer Kohlar came.
Q: Identify exhibit 124.
A: Chelsea Gerlach.
Q: Identify exhibit 112.
A: Picture of Jennifer Kohlar
Q: Identify exhibit 116.
A: Stan Meyerhoff
Q: Identify exhibit 118.
A: Nathan
Q: Do you know Brianna?
A: Yes.
Q: Was she present at these meetings?
A: No.
Q: What was the topic at these meetings?
A: We talked about what we wanted to do, the experience people had, direct
action ideas. At the third meeting we had a training by Stan and Chelsea
on how to build an incendiary device. We learned to solder components. Q:
Any other trainings?
A: At the second meeting we learned anonymous communication from simple to
sophisticated, generic email/ access through proxy. Different methods of
encryption. Jennifer taught PGP, a type of encryption. We learned how to
do recon, lock picking, and breaking and entering.
Q: What else did you discuss?
A: Philosophies and hands on tactics. Those meetings were not exclusive
to do actions.
Q: Did you discuss genetic engineering?
A: Yes, that was a strong agenda for Daniel and Suzanne, and quickly
became group agenda.
Q: Do most in the affinity group have nicknames?
A: Yes. Bill Rogers was Avalon, Suzanne was India, McGowen was Sorrel. Q:
What was yours?
A: Most people know me as Lacey, maybe knew me as Reba.
Q: Did genetic engineering become a focus?
“Washington. The email was encrypted. I had to decode it. It told me
the time and place to meet. It was a Starbuck’s in Pullman. Drove there
with Cheslea. We met India and did the action.
Q: What was the action?
A: We pulled canola out of the field. We had a disagreement about which
action to do: the barley or the canola. We did the canola.
Q: What is genetic engineering?
A: Introducing a foreign gene.
Q: Tell me about the action.
A: We pulled the canola out of a small trial field. It was like pulling
weeds at night. There were 8-10 people. Myself, Chelsea, Joyana, Nathan,
Justin, Suzanne, and either Avalon or Stan, I’m not sure.
Q: Can you identify exhibit 115?
A: It’s a picture of Justin Solanz.
Q: Did you have a name for your meetings?
A: Yes, ‘Book club meetings.”
Q: Was Justin at “Bookclub?”
A: No.
Q: What precautions did you take in the action?
A: We wore black and gloves, had someone be the lookout, and tried to be
inconspicuous.
Q: Was a communiqué written?
A: I think so.
Q: What is a communiqué?
A: It’s where a person or a group claims responsibility for an action. Q:
Why?
A: So people understand that it was not a random act.
Q: Did you have involvement in writing communiqués?
A: Yes, I helped in writing that communiqué.
Q: Why are they anonymous?
A: So there is no association.
Afternoon recess
We entered courtroom after recess. Lacey on the witness stand, laughing
and smiling with the cops.
Q: Identify exhibit 273.
A: I think it is the communiqué for the field action.
Q: Can you read the headlines?
A: “Dusty’s Desporados raid Monsanto…”
Q: Were you involved in the Poplar Tree Action.
A: Yes, March ’01.
Q: had you been involved in discussions before the action?
A: Yes, I talked to McGowan at the WTO protest, it became a focus of
research. Poplar is the first non crop plant genetically engineered. Q:
Who was involved in research?
A: Steve Straus was doing research at Oregon State.
Q: Was there an action planned around the Straus research/
A: Yes, we were working on an action to destroy the trees. Some thought
we were moving too slow. Others moved to do the action in early March.
The trees were destroyed by girdling.
Q: Identify exhibit 292C.
A: I think it’s a tree at the site. We rubbed a chisel to break the
cambium layer of the tree. That’s the layer under the bark. The tree
will die. It’s called girdling.
Q: The action was at two plots. Were you at both?
A: No. I went one night to one site, thought I saw headlights and called
off the action. I was with McGowan, Nathan, Stan, and some other person.
Q: Who was on the other team?
A: I’m unsure. Maybe Gerlach was on radio relay and someone called
Spring. Q: How many people and how many trees?
A: Thirty people, hundreds of trees. People went back another night
without me.
Q: Identify exhibit 293.
A: It’s a communiqué of the completed action.
Q: Can you read it?
A: “ Visited by night… cut down ring barked… 1,200 trees destroyed…
Frankentrees… Eco warriors”
Q: Did someone approach you in a bar in May of ’01?
A: I met Stan and Chelsea at a bar, they conversed in French, which I
didn’t understand. Then they asked me to be involved in an action and
told me I would need to go north with Stan Thursday night.
Q: When was the action.
A: Late Sunday night, May 10th or 11th.
Q: Were Stan and Chelsea involved in a relationship?
A: They have been dating since high school, but things were on the outs.
Q: Were you involved with Stan?
A: Flirtatious at this point.
Q: Are you still involved.
A: Yes, we’re engaged.
Q: Did you go north with Stan.
A: yes, with Stan, Suzanne, and Daniel. I have vivid memories of the
music we listened to in the car.
Q: Where did you go?
A: Olympia. I was dropped off at a Denny’s. I was the only one who
stayed. Stan got out of the car to talk to somebody, and then left. Q:
Who did you meet there?
A: Jen Kohlar, Brianna, Justin, and Avalon.
Q: Identify exhibit 101A
Objection by the Defense: “This exhibit is suggestive, so it is not
accepted.”
Judge has the Prosecutor identify who in the picture was at the restaurant
and cover up the rest.
Q: Name the five people at the restaurant.
A: Justin, Brianna, Jen, myself, and Avalon. This is the first time I’ve
met Brianna.
The witness identifies Brianna in the courtroom.
I was unfamiliar with Brianna, but Avalon vouched for Brianna, and vouched
for me.
Brianna and I started to walk to the back of the restaurant. Avalon
brought us to the front. I was uncomfortable talking about the subject
matter in public. The next morning I went running at a track near a house
where Brianna was playing violin. She stopped playing when I arrived. Q:
Identify exhibit 733.
A: This is three different pictures of the house where we met that
weekend. I think I stayed at that house. We went out to an out building
in the backyard.
Q: Who went out to the outbuilding?
A: Brianna, Avalon, Justin, and myself.
Q: What did you discuss?
A: Justin was talking about incendiary devices, improvements he has made
to the design, and how he was using these bladder bags that he dumpster
dived.
Q: Was Brianna present?
A: I believe so.
Q: What else do you remember?
A: I remember being in a field, there were five of us: Avalon, Jen,
myself, Brianna, and Justin. Jen outlined how who intended to break the
windows using some stained glass cutting tools. It was supposed to be
quieter. I had the impression it would be soundless. We also talked
about who would claim responsibility in the communiqué. We also met at
Evergreen, discussed the finer details; the amount of fuel we should use…
Jen thought we should use less fuel, Avalon thought we should use more
fuel to make sure it would not be put out by the sprinkler system.
Avalon’s view prevailed.
Q: What happened at the end of the weekend?
A: We drove back south.
Q: What were people’s responsibilities?
A: My responsibility was to secure black clothes for myself; Brianna was
supposed to secure a vehicle.
Q: Explain the type of clothes.
A: It was important to wear clothes that were unassociated with us. Dark
clothing.
Q: Because the action was in the city, did that have an effect on the
clothes you would wear?
A: Yes, we didn’t want to be walking around looking like thugs.
Q: Tell me about the car.
A: It was also preferable to have a car disassociated with us. This was
often the lynch pin in the action. Brianna was supposed to rent a car. I
was concerned.
Q: She would rent a car herself?
A: I was told someone she trusted was going to rent a car. Maybe a
distant relative?
Q: Did you know the person renting the car?
A: No. Anyone in the know would be implicated. Brianna and her boyfriend
would declare they were having problems and needed a car.
Q: What was Justin’s responsibility?
A: To make the incendiary devices.
Q: Was he doing this alone?
A: I imagine with Avalon
Defense objects. Objection sustained.
Q: What happened at the end of the week?
A: I drove back to Olympia with Suzanne, Daniel, and Stan.
Q: Where in Olympia?
A: Maybe I stayed at Nathan and Joy’s after the crime. I remember being
in an out building one other time.
Q: Who else lived there?
A: Ocean. He was in a wheelchair. And his girlfriend. She had red hair,
I don’t know her name.
Q: What else do you remember?
A: I remember in the outbuilding, part of it was sectioned off. It was a
“clean room”, to build devices.
Q: How do you create a “clean room?”
A: I think they use painting plastic on the sides.
Q: Were you in the “clean room?”
A: I understood we needed to help build the devices. Brianna and I went
in the room. We only looked.
Q: Who took you in there?
A: I don’t remember; either Justin or Avalon.
Q: Did you need to take any special precautions?
A: Yes, we wore cloth painter’s outfits, gloves, and hair covers.
Q: What did you see?
A: Devices.
Q: Any details?
A: Looked sort of like an alarm clock with wires hanging out in a
Tupperware. Q: Any large containers around, like for fuel?
A: Not in the ‘clean room.” We were shown how the bags for the fuel
worked, and how all that was put in a garbage bag, then in a duffle bag.
Q: Identify exhibit 33B.
A: Looks like the Tupperware container to hold fuel.
Q: When did you leave Olympia?
A: The evening of the arson we went to Seattle.
Q: Where in Seattle?
A: To a bar.
Q: Identify exhibit 304A
A: I believe it’s the bar in Seattle we went to: The Green Lake Bar and
Grill.
Q: Who was at the bar?
A: Jen, Avalon, Justin, Brianna, and myself.
Q: How long were you there?
A: An hour or two.
Q: Did you eat or drink?
A: I think I had a salad.
Q: Where did you go after the bar?
A: We drove to UW.
Q: Identify exhibit 303.
A: It’s a map of the university campus. This is where we got dropped off.
Q: Who got dropped off?
A: I don’t have a clear memory of who.
Q: Identify exhibit 304C.
A: This is a picture of the street where we got dropped off near the gate.
At some point, earlier that evening, someone pre positioned the
backpacks. I don’t recall carrying anything when we got out of the car.
Q: Identify exhibit 304D.
A: That is a picture of the gate we passed through.
Q: Identify exhibit 304E.
A: That’s another picture of the gate, and a bush.
Q: Let’s go back to exhibit 303. Locate this on the map.
A: she locates it on the map.
Q: Identify exhibit 304F.
A: Picture of the area from the other direction.
Q: Where in the picture is the gate.
A: This is the gate.
Q: Why is the bush significant?
A: After we came back, Brianna was “lookout” there. I don’t have a clear
memory. I think she had a radio.
Q: What was Brianna’s responsibility?
A: To notify us of security or if anyone noticed our ruckus.
Q: Let’s go back to the map. Where did you go next?
A: She traced on the map where she said the bags were hidden. We couldn’t
drive the care in late at night. Someone drove in earlier and dropped the
bags off.
Q: Identify exhibit 304K.
A: Dumpsters.
Q: What happened at the dumpsters?
A: That’s where the bags were hidden.
Q: identify exhibit 304M &N
A: Yes, this is a view of the area around the wetland.
Q: Was there a path through there?
A: I don’t remember. I just remember the general direction. I crouched
near there with Jennifer. I remember looking to the left and there was a
bike at the bike rack. I was concerned there was someone in the building.
We had a strong commitment to not hurt anyone.
Q: Where was Avalon?
A: At the building checking things out.
Q: What did you see?
A: I think I remember him creeping up to the building. Jen went to break
the window. The broken window was loud. It wasn’t supposed to be that
loud. Avalon was inside. I handed the bags in. He checked the office
and came back to the window with Tupperware containers, indicating to me
to take them out. I opened one up to see snake shapes; quickly covered it
and put the Tupperwares outside.
Q: Do you remember a radio call?
A: I kind of remember Jen received a radio call. We held for a few
minutes, then we proceeded.
Q: Then what?
A: Avalon was inside. I think he set the devices.
Defense objects. Objection sustained.
Q: Did you see or were you told?
A: I couldn’t see much. He may have been narrating, looking for places to
put the devices. He set one near the building, then we left.
Q: Do you recall a radio call?
A: No, not at that point.
Q: Okay, look at the map. Show us what happened next.
A: We were here. Someone called for pick up. Justin was driving the car,
and Brianna was near the bush. I believe someone called and he picked us
up in the rental.
Q: Identify exhibit 775.
A: That’s the rental car. I believe it fits what I remember.
Q: All five of you got in the car? Then what?
A: Justin was driving, I was in back. We had a radio scanner. I remember
driving out of a residential area on a one way street with cars parked on
both sides. As we turned left, Justin nicked that back of a parked car.
It felt huge, but it was not. We stopped, and they switched drivers. Q:
Then where did you go?
A: We were in another residential area, listening to the scanner to hear
the fire response. We heard the call and the firefighter jargon about the
science and possibly chemicals in the building. It was terrifying to me.
Q: Tell us about Avalon.
A: He seemed excited.
Q: How much time had gone by?
A: Not long, five or ten minutes. I pushed to leave.
Q: Where did you go next?
A: We went to a park without Jen. She got dropped off. I remember
thinking how lucky she was. We waited in the park until morning so we
could be more inconspicuous in the morning traffic driving back to Oly. Q:
Where in Olympia?
A: I remember a couple of things. I was at Nathan’s; Avalon and Justin
were trying to fix the dent in the car. I think there was another action
with Joy, Nathan, Daniel, Suzanne, and Stan. I got a little sleep. When
I woke, they were there, excited and talking. The four of us sat and
wrote the communiqué for both actions. Myself, Suzanne, Daniel, and
Nathan.
Q: Then what happened to the communiqué?
A: Chelsea would take it and send it through a safe computer. But days
had passed, and no claim had been made.
The judge intervenes. It’s 4:00p.m. Court recesses until 8:30 a.m.

Eric McDavid Update - 2.14.08

Dear friends,

We just wanted to make sure that everyone was up to date on Eric’s
upcoming hearing on the new trial motion and sentencing. As of right now,
both of these are scheduled to take place on Thursday, February 28th
beginning at 10 am. Please keep in mind that these dates are subject to
change. We’ll do our best to keep everyone informed as information
becomes available to us. Eric would love to see friendly faces in the
courtroom on the 28th. Please consider coming to show your support on
this difficult day in court. The government is still pushing for a 20
year sentence, which would be not only devastating for Eric and his loved
ones, but would also be a true miscarriage of justice (even from a legal
perspective).

Also – please remember to send your letters concerning Eric’s sentencing
for Judge England to MARK REICHEL, Eric’s attorney. This will be your
last chance to speak up for Eric before he is sentenced. Don’t let it
pass you by! For more information on what kinds of things to include in
your letter, please visit: http://www.supporteric.org/updates.htm and
scroll down to the update from 1/8/08.

Thank you all for your continued support!

SPS

Thursday, February 14, 2008

Two new American animal rights prisoners!

Urgent ELP! Bulletin (14th of Feb 2008)

Dear friends

ELP has just learnt that two American animal rights activists have been raided and remanded. Please see the below e-mail:

Recently, two California activists were arrested after a raid on their
home by the Los Angeles Police Department. Laura Lungarelli & Kevin
Olliff have been in the custody of the LAPD since Thursday evening. They
were expecting arraignment yesterday (Monday) but it has been postponed
and they have been sent to housing facilities in the area. Little is
known about the situation. Only that they are facing serious charges
(Second Degree Felony Burglary) with bail set at $100,000 and $165,000
respectively.

Los Angeles Animal Rights Activists Home Raided And Taken To Jail Need
Support

PLEASE REPOST!!!!!!

Recently, two California activists were arrested after a raid on their
home by the Los Angeles Police Department. Laura Lungarelli & Kevin
Olliff have been in the custody of the LAPD since Thursday evening. They
were expecting arraignment yesterday (Monday) but it has been postponed
and they have been sent to housing facilities in the area. Little is
known about the situation. Only that they are facing serious charges
(Second Degree Felony Burglary) with bail set at $100,000 and $165,000
respectively. The charges are not activist related but as Peter Young
suggested "We can always expect there is a political vendetta behind
non-political charges of activists, and that we can never fully draw the
line between what is an "activist related charge" and what is not when
long standing AR activists are charged with non-AR charges. Lets not
forget the charges against Rod Coronado for possession of eagle
feathers, the 18 month sentence for a UT activist for giving incorrect
information on a firearm purchase application, and my multi-count felony
indictment in 2005 for possession of a fake ID."

One thing that can be certain, is that jail is an awful situation to be
in. We cannot be sure how long they will be in these locations, but it
would be both helpful and wise to write them today, in an effort to show
they are being supported by their friends, loved ones, and community at
large.

Laura (Maura) Lungarelli (She was accidentally booked as Maura)
#1167062
PO Box 86164
Terminal Annex
Los Angeles, CA 90086-0164

Kevin Olliff
#1167029
PO Box 86164
Terminal Annex
Los Angeles, CA 90086-0164

PLEASE REPOST!!!!!!

THANK YOU!!!
Sincerely,
Friends of Laura & Kevin


++++++++++

Earth Liberation Prisoners Support Network
BM Box 2407
London
WC1N 3XX
England
www.spiritoffreedom.org.uk

Sadie and Exile Upcoming Event in SF

February 23rd, 2007 at Station 40, San Francisco

"Grüne Flamme"
A Night in Solidarity with 'Green Scare' Prisoners Sadie and Exile

with Ambient, Dubwise and Otherwise sounds from DJ's:
LobsterClaw + iVi (soFat!), Elfmachine (S.P.A.Z.), RMS + Pink.Noise
(Katabatik)

Food and Drink will be available for donation.
Station 40 is located at 3030 B 16th Street (at Mission), Close to 16th
and Mission BART

7PM - Midnight,
$7 - 23 sliding scale

All proceeds will go to those behind the walls

To learn more about the 'Green Scare' and the F.B.I.'s 'Operation
Backfire', go to: http://www.greenscare.org

Notes from Briana Waters’ Trial: Day Two PM Overview plus Day Three (2/13)

February 12, 2008; Day Two
Court resumes after lunch
Prosecutor Friedman calls John Comery to the witness stand; sites his
history background, education, and work experience. Comery identifies
himself as a member of the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) national
response team’s internal arson fire investigator. He has been involved
investigating ALF/ELF claimed arsons since 1997. He spoke briefly of
points linking these arsons i.e. nature of targets, types of devices used,
who claimed responsibility and methodology patterns. Comery goes on to
explain his process of investigation to find origin and cause of fire.
Friedman questions him on a number of fires: Cavel West; Susanville, two
fires in Olympia, Childers meats, Boise Cascade, and Superior lumber.
Comery details the evidence collected, the number of devices used, the
increasing complexity of the devices used, how they work, K-9 involvement,
and claimed responsibility. He read part or all of the communiqués and
sited monetary damage for each fire.
Comery steps down, jury recessed, court adjourned until 9:00 a.m.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008.

February 13, 2008; Day Three
Court resumes 9:00 a.m. John Comery returns to the witness stand and is
cross examined by defense attorney Fox. Fox clarifies that Comery did not
investigate UW fires, asked various questions about timing devices,
ignition devices, and accelerant (fuel). Fox questions Comery about
interviews with Phillabaum, Kolhar, and Meyerhoff. Introduces exhibits of
Comery’s handwritten notes from January interviews with Kolhar; no mention
of Waters. Also introduces FBI 302 report of Meyerhoff interview of March
2006 in which he was shown a photo Waters and states, “ She looks familiar
but was not involved.”
Comery steps down.
Prosecutor calls Donald Rice to the witness stand. Rice is the manager of
Jefferson Poplar Farm. He overviews the history and working dynamics of
the farm and recalls what happened Sunday, May 21. Events of the fire
were detailed, many exhibits entered as evidence.
Cross examination by Friedman who expresses sympathy. Witness is excused
followed by a ten minute recess.
Prosecutor Bartlett calls Cheryl Glenn to the stand. Glenn is an ATF
special agent trained in arson, firearms, and explosives. She
investigated Jefferson Poplar and describes the events. Identifies and
describes evidence sent to ATF lab for classification: buckets, liquids,
device remains, clocks, flares, matches, model rocket igniters. All
exhibits identified and entered as evidence. Cross examination points out
her investigation was of Jefferson Poplar fire only; no other fires in
Washington or Oregon.
Lunch recess.
Prosecutor Bartlett calls Bradley Cooper to the stand. Cooper identifies
himself as ATF terrorist explosive expert. He briefs court and the jury
on his education and training. Cooper currently works as forensic chemist
in Walnut Creek, California. He describes his investigation of the
evidence from Jefferson Poplar fire, and sites 55 exhibits entered as
evidence. Cross examination identifies no involvement in UW case.
Prosecutor calls Brennon Phillips to the witness stand. Phillips
identifies himself as an ATF bomb technician. He uses the word “bomb” no
less than 37 times in his testimony. He details his examination of the
Jefferson Poplar evidence, calling devices, “incendiary bombs.” Defense
objects every time. Bartlett briefly questions Phillips about December
2005 search of Roger’s residence in Prescott, Arizona. He identifies
evidence entered as exhibits i.e. literature, photos, computer discs…
Cross examination inquires about Phillips judgment being influenced by
institutionalized bomb experience, which he denies. Defense tries to
clarify the difference between “incendiary device” and “incendiary bomb.”
Is it the volume of fuel, timing devices, ignition systems, burn rate of
accelerant, and ultimately indicating it is not up to the ATF to
determine. Prosecution objects; Phillips steps down.
Prosecution calls Officer Ronald Trezise to the witness stand, UW police
patrol, on duty the night of the fire. He identifies maps and photos.
Cross examination indicates he saw nothing unusual before fires broke out.
Prosecutor calls Dan Priest to the witness stand, Seattle fire department,
station 38, first responder. He details the event. Cross examination
questions discrepancy of 50 minutes documented dispatch time. Witness is
excused, jury is dismissed. Court adjourns tomorrow morning at 9:00 a.m.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Update on PRican PP: Oscar Lopez Rivera

The ProLibertad Freedom Campaign forwards this WONDERFUL NEWS from the NBHRN website about OSCAR LOPEZ RIVERA!!

Puerto Rican Political Prisoner Oscar López Rivera transferred to medium security prison

After 27 years in maximum and super-maximum security prisons, today, Wednesday, February 13, 2008, Puerto Rican political prisoner Oscar López Rivera was moved to a medium security prison.

This is a result of his excellent record in prison, but it is also due to the tremendous vigilance and defense of his rights by the organizations involved in the campaign for his and Carlos Alberto Torres release. While he is still being singled out for special, more onerous treatment, including being required to report to prison staff every two hours, this is the first time in almost three decades that he is in a medium security prison.

Buoyed by the warm send-off from his fellow prisoners at the USP (maximum), and by the warm welcome from those at the FCI (medium), he will adjust to his new surroundings.

The National Boricua Human Rights Network celebrates his transfer as a victory and urges all to write to Oscar. More news about the transfer to follow.

His new postal mailing address:
Oscar López Rivera
87651-024
FCI Terre Haute
P.O. Box 33
Terre Haute, IN 47808

Notes from Briana Waters’ Trial: Days One and Two (incomplete)

1) Day One Notes – Jury Selection
2) Day Two – Notes from Prosecution Opening Statement
3) Day Two – Notes from Defense Opening Statement (incomplete)
4) Day Two – Notes from John Comery’s Testimony

These are all unofficial notes from court observers. Future reports will
be more succinct than the lengthy and incomplete notes for Day Two below.

Government informant Lacey Phillabaum has been scheduled to testify
tomorrow, February 14 at the Western District of Washington Court in
Tacoma. Her testimony may get pushed back until morning of the following
day, however.
Announcement below:
“We were just informed that the feds announced that Lacey Phillabaum will
be called to testify against Briana Waters tomorrow, February 14th, as the
last witness of the day. Things have been going fairly slowly in terms of
witness testimony, so there is a chance she may not testify until Friday
morning. Briana has asked for support in the courtroom if possible. If
you can come to federal court in Tacoma, Washington the next 2 days,
please plan to do so and spread the word. Housing may be available. You
will need picture id, no laptops, etc., and PLEASE dress appropriately for
court or don't come anywhere near the courthouse (this is a jury trial).”

For those thinking of attending court, please check “Dressing in support
of Briana Waters at Trial,” located at:
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2008/02/372072.shtml

Briana Waters’ official support site is at supportbriana.org

Also, check cldc.org/waters for further updates and background information.

***

DAY ONE NOTES – JURY SELECTION

First day results from Briana Waters Trial

Jury selection began at 9:00 am and what was expected to last only a few
hours ended up taking most of the day. Unsurprisingly, most of Briana's
supporters were not allowed in the courtroom during the jury selection
until the overflow of jurors were eventually let go around 3:00pm and
there was more room. After a short break Briana's supporters filled the
audience area, along with various media outlets and trial sketch artists.
In the final hour several issues were resolved regarding the procedures of
the trial, and it was determined that the Defense Attorneys would be
provided the names of upcoming witnesses one day in advance. They will
also be provided with a summary of what their testimony will be.

Find out who will be testifying the next day at the www.CLDC.org web site!
Also keep checking Indymedia for important trial updates.

The schedule for tomorrow looks like:
9am-noon Opening Statements
12-1 lunch break
1pm-4Pm Taking the stand : FBI Agent J. Comrey, Glenn, Cooper, Phillips,
and Rice

***

DAY TWO – NOTES FROM PROSECUTION OPENING STATEMENT


Notes from Briana Waters Trial Day 2
U.S. District Court of Western Washington (Tacoma)
Judge Burgess presiding

(scribe’s note: All remarks are paraphrased, not verbatim as spoken.
Because of the sheer volume of information and the desire to make it
public as soon as possible, punctuation and grammar protocol may be
ignored outright.)

Some abbreviations will be used throughout this text. The scribe does not
guarantee correct spellings or transcriptions of names and other proper
nouns.

DEF: Defense
The defendant, Briana waters is represented by attorneys Neal Fox and
Robert Bloom

US: Prosecution
The plaintiff in this case is the United States government, represented by
federal prosecutors Andrew Friedman and Mark Barlett. Mr. Bartlett, in my
observation, did not present remarks, evidence or make motions, so US in
this text refers to words and actions of Mr. Friedman. Sitting with the
prosecuting attorneys was also FBI agent Ted Howla (sp?).

The proceedings began before the jury was brought in.

US: Yesterday we heard for the first time that Mr. Fox anticipates going
into the area that the FBI might have changed or tailored witness
testimony if the agents were concerned about the OPR Office of
Professional Responsibility or a civil lawsuit.

The defense needs to be aware that if this issue is raised, it is the
government’s strong position that this would open up the door to airing in
court what agents knew - especially Agent Howla – that overwhelmingly
leads to guilt, but may not be admissible. For instance, Chelsea Gerlach
says that she and the defendant cooperated on writing a communiqué, and
that Briana obtained a car for one of the Oregon actions. Howla would have
to bring this information to light in an open statement.

DEF: the issue will not be raised.

Judge: this is premature, as the defense has not raised the issue.

Judge is ready to bring in the jury and proceed but Bloom is absent due to
having to run out for papers he forgot. Both Fox and Friedman request
waiting until he returns to begin opening statements.

US: this is going to be a long trial, and if it goes to appeal, we don’t
want Bloom’s absence at opening statements to be an issue on appeal.
Request 10 minutes.

The judge wants to proceed. Fox mentions the 6th amendment in defense of
waiting or counsel to be present for the opposition’s opening statement.

Recess.

US: has an issue with an exhibit that Bloom intends or may intend to bring
up – a motion to prevent admission of notes taken by agents, reports by
agents in interviews. If Bloom intends to do that, US will object and ask
that he be instructed not to.

Judge: defense and client are to be present at 8:30 am to take up any
issues that need to be addressed before the jury comes in – if you are not
here the court will proceed without you!

Jury is brought in.

Judge: instructs the jury to hear all the evidence that evidence may be
circumstantial or direct and they are to give it the same weight. They are
to make decision based only on evidence and not the proceedings that are
not evidence, such as motions made by counsel and how the court rules.

PROSECUTION OPENING STATEMENT:

US: From 1997 to 2001 a group of extremists blazed a trail of destruction
through WA and OR, the Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front
claimed to protect environmental and animal rights. They selected
facilities they thought hurt the environment and animals and burned them.
They didn’t worry about danger to firefighters or people who may have been
inside, paid no attention to how their actions impacted people who worked
in the buildings or the community, or that the fires were themselves bad
for the environment.

1997 Fire at Cavel West – picture displayed on monitor for jurors and
judge – Months later a wild horse corral – picture, 1998 in Olympia WA the
USDA Nat’l Wildlife and Animal Damage Control bldgs (more pics), Childer’s
Meat Packing plant (pic), Boise Cascade (pic). In 2001 Superior lumber
(pic), then in spring 2001, the biggest yet, two arsons on the same night
in OR and WA, hundreds of miles apart but coordinated. This was to show
that the movement was strong, gaining ground – they called it the “double
whammy”.

There were two teams of five people each. The UW team was headed by
William Rodgers, the leader of the group, also called Avalon. The UW
group was Rodgers, Briana Waters (defendant), her boyfriend at the time
Justin Solondz, Jennifer Kolar, and Lacey Phillabaum.

They plotted for weeks and built complicated firebombs at a house the
defendant rented. She had her cousin rent a car to use in the action. They
drove it to Seattle, had dinner, drove to the Urban Horticulture bldg,
near a residential area, parked on a hill in the residential neighborhood
block away from the bldg. Waters stayed in the bushes with a radio while
the others broke into an office. A police officer came through the area
and Waters radioed the others, but the officer left without noticing
anything. The team set firebombs, Waters picked them up, and they left.

At 3:15 am a fire broke out at the bldg – a huge fire. You will hear from
two of the firefighters who responded that it was a three alarm fire, the
biggest that year with flames that reached 75 feet. It took hours to put
out the fire and the building was totally destroyed.

They were wrong in every way. The target, Toby Bradshaw, was attacked
because they believed he was genetically engineering poplar trees. You
will hear from him that he was cross-breeding trees as farmers have done
for thousands of years. The fire also destroyed offices and labs of all
the other researchers, such as Sarah ____, who was researching the risk of
foreign plants invading and how to protect native plants. Populations of
endangered native plants were destroyed as well as rare botany books. If
there was one building in Seattle that helped the environment it was
probably the Center for Urban Horticulture.

Friedman introduces himself, Bartlett and Howla

US: the prosecution will prove that the defendant was one of the five on
the UW arson team.
We will prove it through the testimony of Lacey Phillabaum and Jennifer
Kolar. They will tell you that they were one of the five and each will
tell you that the defendant was with them.

We will prove through other evidence documentary and physical evidence
documentary and physical that links her to people involved and to the
crime.

We will show you the rental record of the car her cousins rented; you will
hear testimony from her cousins that she told them something untrue, took
the car until after daylight the next day –

We will begin with background on the ELF and ALF, groups that claim they
are trying to protect the environment and animals. But they are not like
the Sierra Club or the Audubon Society; they don’t lobby or engage in the
political process or in demonstrations. They claim those actions are
ineffective, and that they must cause damage to those with whom they
disagree to be effective.

They are not traditional organizations, no membership roll – they organize
in cells of between five to two dozen people. Members of cells know each
other but not members of other cells – a classic organizational structure
for terrorist or guerilla organizations. They have no central hierarchy,
with one exception. Because their goal is to further an ideology, each
has a press officer - you will hear from a press officer Craig Rosebraugh
– when they commit actions they write a communiqué to prove it was the ELF
and explain why they did it – criticism of the target and a threat to do
it again if they don’t change their ways. The communiqué is delivered
anonymously to the press officer and posted on the web, spread around.

The fires in Washington and Oregon are all the crimes of one cell – a
prolific cell – headed by Avalon and with approximately twenty members
including the defendant.

You will hear a lot about Avalon, who was not formally the head but set
the direction – he wrote a variety of manuals and books on arson including
one called “Setting Fires with Electrical Timers” that was posted on the
ELF website so others could do what they did.

The way in which they did the arsons made it difficult to catch them –
they went to tremendous lengths to conceal their identities and to prevent
capture. Initially they conducted a search to select targets – for
example facilities isolated in rural areas – that made it possible to
prevent capture. They performed reconnaissance – scouted to plan the
action. They built complicated firebombs and you will hear about the
evolution of these devices, but they all followed a model that included a
mechanical or digital timer, which runs until the time set, completes a
circuit to a battery, current flows to a light bulb filament or a model
rocket igniter set next to matchbooks, which ignite the next step, a
sponge soaked in gasoline or a road flare, placed next to a gallon jug or
open buckets of gasoline/diesel mix. They used multiple devices, each
with as much as ten gallons, built in "clean rooms” designed to prevent
leaving physical evidence.

Then, wearing dark clothes, they often held a dry run a week before to the
night before the action, to go through what would happen. Each member of
the team had a specific goal, for example, a lookout with a radio and
police scanners - another role might be to help carry the devices, or to
set the devices.

On the night of the action, they would go to the site usually early in the
morning, 2-3 am. They would set firebombs and leave, the timer would go
off, then the fire started, and because they were so successful, they
typically destroyed the targets. The fire destroyed any forensic
evidence. It took law enforcement years to solve – for years they made
no progress.

In 2004, agents working on the case got a break. They developed enough
evidence to convince a member of the cell to cooperate and provide
information – then got other members to cooperate – it came apart like a
chain of dominos.

The arson at UW was a hard one to solve. They got their first break on
this one in 2005, when they learned Jennifer Kolar had participated in
Cavel West. They approached her and she cooperated – gave an interview
with her lawyer present. Investigators didn’t promise her anything – she
was threatened with a long sentence, up to 35 years mandatory minimum, but
she had committed other arsons so maybe longer – but they told her
situation would be better if she cooperated.

She said she had the least clear memory of the UW fire – she named
Rodgers, “Capitol Hill Girl,” “Capitol Hill Girl’s boyfriend,” and “Crazy
Dan” in the first sessions. She never mentioned the name Briana Waters.

Three weeks later her lawyer called and told agents that Kolar recalled
the name of the lookout – and named Briana Waters.

It was the first time investigators heard her name – she wasn’t even on
the radar screen. Investigators began to investigate her. Who was she?

Meanwhile, other interviews concluded Lacey Phillabaum was an arsonist
(not identified by Kolar). Agents contacted her family and told her
father they had evidence. Again no specific promise was made but she was
told it would be better for her if she cooperated. On Feb. 21 (year?) she
came in with her lawyer and confirmed that she participated with Rodgers,
Kolar, Briana Waters, and named Justin Solondz.

You will hear from Kolar, who will serve 5-7 years, and Phillabaum, who
will serve 3-5 years – they have each entered into plea bargains – and
they will tell about what happened. Also corroborating evidence will be
produced.

The defendant was from Pennsylvania. She came to Washington in 1997 to go
to The Evergreen State College where she became involved in enviro/animal
causes. In 1998 she coordinated the animal rights group at TESC, and they
even hosted Craig Rosebraugh.

She became close to Rodgers (Avalon) – how do we know? His cell phone
records. He used a third name, Todd Hager, to further distance himself
from his true name. He couldn’t get a cell phone under that name so he
turned to Briana, a poor student, but she got one in her name and paid
bills from her account and gave it to Rodgers. You will see evidence that
the number shows up in address books as Avalon. So she helped him conceal
his identity. The phone is important also because if you look at the
calls they show you regular calls to where she was living - his shows how
close they were, she was one of the people he called the most.

In 2000, Avalon wanted to scale things up – he organized “book club
meetings” in different locations, but with mostly the same participants.
They had meetings in Eugene, Arizona, California, Olympia, and Sisters,
OR. The meetings started out fairly general – what was a worthwhile thing
to focus on? They selected genetic engineering. Over time they went from
philosophical to tactical discussions. Then they had a demo on building
firebombs and practiced soldering. The meetings were a base from which to
recruit people.

Briana Waters didn’t attend the meetings. She didn’t have to because
Avalon recruited her directly – he already knew her.

They focused on genetically engineered poplar trees, therefore on three
professors/entities – Steve Strauss at OR State U, Jefferson Poplar Farm
in Oregon, and Toby Bradshaw at UW became targets.

In March, 2001, members attacked several plots of poplar trees – they
girdled the bark – grown by Strauss. In May they planned the attack on
Jefferson Poplar Farm and UW.

Kolar and Phillabaum approached them in early May, 2001 – came to Olympia
and had meetings. There were two sets of meetings, one for people
planning the UW arson, and one for people planning the Jefferson Poplar
arson.

The first meeting was in introduction, at a Denny’s – the first place
Phillabaum meets Briana Waters. Then they met in a field at TESC and had
a discussion about whether or not the actions would be under the ELF.
Phillabaum was surprised Waters didn’t back up her position on this.

They talked about how much fuel to use, how to get in the building – Kolar
was working with stained glass, she know how to cut glass and had
glass-cutting tools. Everyone was assigned roles.

Solondz made the firebombs. Waters came up with the rental car.
Phillabaum recalls Waters said she would have an aunt rent the car. She
didn’t know if it was a true biological aunt or just a woman she was close
to.

The following weekend, they went back to Olympia, to a building out back
of the house where Briana Waters lived. Justin Solondz took them to the
clean room and showed them firebombs. Phillabaum thought it was so
everyone was responsible, would have to own responsibility for them.

Sunday evening, they drove up to Green Lake Bar and Grill and met with
Kolar. Then to UW, to the neighborhood on the hill. They walked to the
end of the street. There is a bush with a view. Waters stayed there with
a radio, the others walked down in dark clothes but no hoods, trying to
look like students but in dark clothes. They carried backpacks and
Rubbermaid tubs. They came to the building after 2 AM. At one point an
officer went in to patrol, she radioed, but he left.

You will hear how Jen Kolar cut the glass but a pane crashed to the ground
– they hunkered down and waited – then Avalon went in the window and the
others handed in the firebombs. They set the time for after 3 AM, then
came out and radioed and Briana Waters picked them up. They drove back
towards Green Lake, dropped off Jen Kolar, then waited at Green Lake Park
– they were concerned about traffic cameras - for morning rush hour
traffic.

While they were waiting they listened on a scanner to police and fire
responding – Avalon was excited like a little boy about the fire, at the
destruction and the fear.

That you will hear from Jennifer Kolar and Lacey Phillabaum is significant.

Arson is an unusual crime – it destroys the scene of the crime and leaves
no forensic evidence.

But there is other evidence – agents continued the investigation – asked
Kolar and Phillabaum if they had anything left from those days. Kolar had
a blue tub with stuff in it, red lights, papers, walkie-talkies. She
found a manila folder with articles in it and a note that said “hey woman,
take a look – we’ll talk later [heart] B”. Kolar thought she got it from
Briana. It contained articles about the ELF and ALF and even the fires
that night.

Agent Howla took the folder and sent it to the FBI lab – they found Briana
Waters’ fingerprint.

Also, there is evidence Solondz after returning to TESC moved to a cabin
in Brinnon on the Olympic peninsula. He took papers and left them there.
Agents found there a bag of black hats and shower caps (that would be used
in a “clean room”) and a map of Seattle, 24 panels, and folded open to the
panel with the UW Center for Urban Horticulture.

Also a piece of information about the rental car. Agent Howla tried to
figure out who the “aunt” was – went to every rental car company and
checked the lists – found a record of Carol Larson who rented a car on
Saturday morning, May 19 from Budget. It was checked in at 6:33 Tuesday
morning , so probably dropped off after hours Monday night (the arson was
Monday morning), and had 200 miles on it, enough to drive to Seattle and
back.

Agents interviewed Carol Larson and her husband Robert Carina, who is
Briana Waters’ first cousin. Did they rent a car? They had not recalled
when first asked – but when he provided records they did recall. Carina
will testify Briana lived with him for number of months in 2000 and left
boxes in his basement. The week before the car rental, she called and
suggested he rent a car – she could use it to move the boxes out of the
basement. He had no drivers’ license to he went to his wife to do it.

On Sunday, Briana showed up – said she felt sick, had serious stomach
pain, and needed to go the emergency room. Justin didn’t have his car
(because as you will hear, Suzanne Savoie had it in Oregon for the other
action). Carina thought it was odd because she didn’t look sick and they
were in no great hurry to get to the ER. After they were gone he could
not call anyone to ask after her because he couldn’t find the handset from
his phone! Briana never came back until daylight the next day – said she
couldn’t get into Olympia ER and they had to drive to Seattle. Agents
checked Olympia ERs and there was no record she tried to get in, or that
she was turned away. And they usually don’t turn people away.

There was no record because she went to commit the arson. Also, when she
showed up, she reached in her sweatshirt and pulled out the handset and
said she took it by mistake! So he couldn’t call to see where she was or
was not.

Briana Waters is charged with 5 charges (this part was confusing, not sure
I got it write –scribe)
Two counts of aiding and abetting arson –two because its jurisdictional,
the building received federal funding and so it is a federal crime (?) One
count of making destructive devices
One count of aiding and abetting the possession of a destructive device
One count of aiding and abetting the use of a destructive device

Jennifer Kolar’s folder of articles included an article by Craig
Rosebraugh – it cited the success of the ELF/ALF and said they need to do
more…
(reads a passage) Targets are limited in nature and 34 million dollars in
damages- is this enough? People should pick the best target, the best
tactics – think big – Wall Street, the Stock Market, the Statue of
Liberty, and Disneyland (etc).

The evidence shows that Briana Waters did what Craig Rosebraugh advocated
and what Avalon wanted by escalating from rural isolated targets to a big
city – she was thinking big.

END OF PROSECUTION OPENING STATEMENT.


***

DAY TWO – NOTES FROM DEFENSE OPENING STATEMENT (INCOMPLETE)

DEFENSE OPENING STATEMENT

DEF Robert Bloom: First, I want to thank the jury for taking the time –
this is an experience you will cherish for the rest of your life, a
powerful experience, and one of the most important things a citizen can
do. Please reserve judgment until you’ve heard it all.

Not only has Briana Waters pleaded not guilty, she is not guilty.
(Defense introduces defense team and client)
She is completely innocent, not involved in this or any other arson. The
government’s proof is what is on trial. The government must prove beyond
a reasonable doubt, the burden of proof is on the government.

Every couple of weeks we read about some innocent person getting out of
jail who was falsely accused. This is the case here. She is falsely
accused.

It is the jury who is the final judge. Don’t leave at the door your
common sense, life experience. That’s why the jury is not machines.
Those last few words – Disneyland? The Statue of Liberty? Don’t be
influenced by those words, that’s not what this is about. Its about a
group of fools who thought it would be a good idea to burn buildings,
including Jennifer Kolar and Lacey Phillabaum, and Stan Meyerhoff. They
did all that he said, but not including Briana Waters.

She was not at meetings, she wasn’t part of it. He used the word “they”
at least 150 times, but this is about what, if anything, Briana Waters
did or didn’t do. There’s no dispute about what “they” did and that it was
wrong.

Jennifer Kolar and Lacey Phillabaum were facing at least 35 years if they
didn’t cooperate. You will see them, be able to judge what kind of people
they are.

Waters is innocent not on a technicality, but because she simply wasn’t
involved. You will hear about her and what she was and is doing with her
life. The burden of proof is on the government – that was not always the
case. In Salem, an accused witch had to prove she was not a witch. The
constitution made it always the prosecution with the burden of proof. The
prosecutor talked about what did these groups do, but the question is what
did she do or not do? She was involved in the TESC animal rights group,
and Earth First! She was a communications major working on a documentary
project about the Watch Mountain campaign – the film talks about the
events at Randle, a small community, where the timber company wanted to
clearcut above the town. We know that means floods, and the end of Randle.
People, from the ELF, Earth First, you know, hippies, treehuggers, people
who want to save the environment got together with the people in Randle.
They were different, but the people of Randle appreciated the support and
within weeks the people of Randle were up in the trees with them. Ms
Waters chose as her project to document these evenets – she wrote,
produced, directed, and scripted Watch. The jury will hopefully see the
film. This is how she spent her time from 1999 to April 2001, ending about
a month before Phillabaum, Kolar, and their associates burned the UW
building. She was working day and night to put together the film, and
then to distribute it. She was busy with her life. She is a musician, has
played violin since childhood. She plays in the occasional band, Irish
fiddle, bluegrass, Balkan music – that is her love. She was spending her
time with friends and family, boyfriend, (as she does today with her
husband and daughter), while “they” were planning and burning. During
this time she was involved with events and and production of Watch – also
working with the Longshore Workers’ Union to overcome class differences
and create bonds. She is working-class, and worked in solidarity with
unions. This was not warfare between loggers and treehuggers.

She is not an arsonist, she has pleaded NOT guilty, unlike literally every
other person involved in these events. Most of the accused were named in
the Dec 7 2005 Eugene indictment. Everyone else except a few who are
fugitives has pleaded guilty. She pleads NOT guilty and wants a trial or
the case dismissed as should have been done a year ago.

If you were to search my house today you would find books about
capitalism, about free enterprise, and about communism – does my
possession of these make me a communist? If I share reading material does
it mean I advocate the subject?

Don’t let them treat you like you don’t understand. Don’t let them scare
you (Disneyland!) Use your own judgment.

From 1996 to 2001, there were about seventeen arsons for which the ELF
took credit. They were dangerous to people surrounding and occupying the
buildings, to the firefighters who responded. They were wrong for every
reason, there is no dispute about that. We know Jennifer Kolar went to
meetings, planned, taught how to encrypt messages, was involved in
building incendiary devices – so did Lacey Phillabaum – that’s who they
are. They were involved in reconnaissance, selecting targets – also Stan
Meyerhoff, the fiance of Lacey Phillabaum – also in the Oregon cases he
became a cooperating witness within two hours and spouted many names
including naming his own fiancee with days (hours?) of his arrest.

The mandatory minimum of 35 years – that’s for one arson and he and Kolar
have multiple charges and face life. Phillabaum admitted to only one
arson, so faces 35 years, which is essentially her whole life. But they
made deals – Phillabaum now only faces 3-5 years and Kolar 5-7 so it is
very much in their interest to please the prosecution. So they will say
what the prosecution wants to hear – they have a high incentive to please
them.

Meyerhoff, in the OR cases, got the highest sentence because he was
involved in everything. Planner, theoretician, etc. Evidence will show
Meyerhoff was involved in the “double whammy”, planning, recon,
constructing every aspect. Meyerhoff was arrested in Virginia on Dec. 7,
2005, and started naming names, to his benefit. It was not to his benefit
(though not necessarily against it) if shown a picture and he said that
person was not involved. He was not reluctant to name names On March 17,
2006…

US: OBJECTION: Meyerhoff is not on the witness list.
DEF: we may have to get him on the witness list.
(Judge allows DEF to continue… not sure exactly what he said.)

On March 17, 2006, Stan Meyerhoff was questioned by FBI agents and shown
pictures, one was of Briana. (The picture is put up on the monitors for
the jury). Its obviously a picture of Briana, looks like her. He was
asked if she looked familiar. He said she looked familiar but was not
involved in any arson. The case should have ended then because they knew
from a person who did all he could to cooperate including name his own
fiancee that Briana was not involved. But the prosecution couldn’t give
up their centerpiece – the domestic terrorism case.

How did they get Briana’s name and picture? – That came up with Jen Kolar,
we will get to that later.

Meyerhoff said other things, described a blonde woman from Olympia, but
not in connection to UW, but a later fire at Susanville, a rural place in
California – a blonde woman from Olympia, but originally from California.
A person in connection with Joe Dibee (a fugitive) – a different person,
clearly.

At Susanville people (8 to 10) camped out for several days but Briana
wasn’t there, so no one knew her to implicate her in that action.

The Oregon conspiracy indictment lists 25 overt acts committed by members.
Briana Waters is named only in the UW action, not in Susanville.

About Avalon – the prosecutor told how they took pains not to leave a
trail. She gets the phone, pays the bill – she’s not trying to hide her
name. He said it was because he had credit problems – his relationship
with her related to her above ground public life as an environmental
activist. Why would she get a phone for him if she knew what it entailed
to her security, if she was worried about that. He wouldn’t ask her to
get the phone if she was connected to the crimes.

About the devices – the accusation regarding use of a destructive device –
one that Phillabaum and Kolar were facing – so we will have to talk about
it but its not our focus – the focus is she didn’t do it, she wasn’t
there.

The case was frustrating for law enforcement until Jake Ferguson became an
informant. He was promised a sentence of probation, no prison time. He
wore a wire – made a recording of who said what, the best evidence of what
was said. When the FBI spoke to Phillabaum and Kolar, they had the option
of using a tape recorder. The prosecution chose not to use it. If we had
a recording, you would hear what they said and not have to rely upon their
memories or the memories of agent Howla and prosecutors. But they didn’t
record it. Kolar first named herself, Avalon, Capitol Hill Girl, Capitol
Hill Girl’s Punk Boyfriend, and Crazy Dan.

NOT Briana Waters. As Stan Meyerhoff has said, she was NOT involved.

What is happening here is wrong, an outrage. She should not be here.

About who she is: In high school in PA she began to play violin. She
teaches violin, that’s how she makes a modest living. Also playing in
small bands, in small venues. Her husband John works as a carpenter. You
will learn from evidence what kind of people they are. She went to
college in a small school in Ohio – then came out here and fell in love
with TESC, transferred – got involved in environmental activities. This
is the kind of person she is, not an arsonist.

She got involved in the documentary project, that’s how she spent her
time. You may hear from a Randle resident about those events.

We will try to offer the documentary in evidence – it will be up to the
judge. It will show how she spent her time and what kind of person she
is.

Meanwhile, the ELF (they) did what they do, but what, if anything, did she
do? One thing is that people in the ELF move around, have aliases. Jen
Kolar was known as “Diver”, Phillabaum as “Reba”, and Meyerhoff as
“Countryboy”. Briana Waters was known as “Briana” – or “Bri” – she had no
code name, no alibi. She rented a house, and had a boyfriend.

When they got her name they investigated her phone records, her bank
records, her mother’s records, her grandparents’ records, her credit card,
her TESC records, Justin Solondz’s info, stuff from his house, stuff from
Avalon’s house. In all the stuff from Avalon’s house, there is one
mention of Briana Waters, in a list of enviro resources – her film.

Nothing incriminating was found, They got all her TESC records, reports
she wrote, what her professors said about her, all the banks where she had
a credit card, her spending records, shopping records, her father, her
brother, her own website. All they have is innuendo –

About the car-
After they got her name they spoke to Kolar and Phillabaum – Feb. 4 ’06.
Agent Howla went to Briana’s house in Berkeley and politely asked her to
get a lawyer and cooperate. She got a lawyer but had nothing to cooperate
on. When they asked her to cooperate something happened re. Conversations
between the prosecution and Briana Waters, we will get back to it.

Soon after retaining a lawyer she contacted her friends and family and
said I am accused but innocent- if the FBI comes around, don’t worry about
it, tell the TRUTH.

[There is a bit more stuff that follows, mostly about the car.]


***

DAY TWO – NOTES FROM JOHN COMERY’S TESTIMONY

Lunch Recess til 1:15
Friedman calls John Comery
Sworn
Credentials, senior special agent ATF investigates firearms and explosives
seasonal firefighter hotshot firefighter til 1987
In October 91 specialize in fire/arson investigation yearly
recertification-current
Certified internal arson fire investigator until current develops guides
and codes
ATF national response team western division explosive specialists
Q’s by Friedman A’s by John Comery
Q: Have you been involved in investigations of ALF/ELF fires from 1997 til
current
A: yes
Q: anything linking these investigations
A: yes, nature of targets, types of devices, and who claimed
responsibility Q: Explain methodology
A: multiple incendiary devices placed outside occurred in early morning
and near holidays
Q: where the number of devices a pattern
A: yes, 2-5 devices
Q: any other patterns
A: yes communiqué claim of responsibility
Q: did you examine devices
A: yes complexity of device unusual, large amount of accelerant and timing
component and power
Q: where they identical
A: no
Q: was there a pattern over time
A: devices evolved to more complex
Q: explain investigation
A: local jurisdiction calls response, at work scene, gather witness info,
suppress the fire, examine remains, what was in building, look for
charring patterns, retrace fire spread, look for mechanism at origin Q:
talk about burn patterns
A: fire starts at bottom spreads up wall reaching soffit
Q: what is next step
A: initial walk around, try to get aerial view, collect any obvious
evidence, examine debris
Q: what types of readily observable evidence are found
A: unburned fuel
Q: what is an accelerant K-9
A: dog trained to sniff ignitable fuel sources, is at nature or cause of
fire Q: what type of evidence do you look for?
A: items related to ignition of fire, timing mechanisms, gas containers,
batteries.
Q: do you collect general debris
A: yes, samples sent to lab
Q: what does this information reach opinion about
A: origin and cause of fire
Prosecution questioning about a number of fires.
Q: what time of day did you learn about cavel west fire
A: early morning
Q: what did you learn
A: spoke to police and fire martial that were called in by a witness at
local bakery, police were first to respond
Q: what time was fire noticed
A: 4 am
Q: who arrived first
A: Redmond police
Q: why did it take so long to contain fire
A: use of accelerant, big building, burn through the afternoon
Q: how much water did it use
A: enough to affect local city water supply
Q: did you prepare diagram of the scene
A: yes
Q: identify exhibit 211
A: yes diagram I drew
Q: generally describe the diagram
A: single story buildings, co-joined office/storage, 16 thousand square
feet burned
Q: did everything burn
A: yes mostly and damaged
Q: identify exhibit 212A
A: aerial photo of site
Q: describe scene
A: photo shows, route 97, cross railroad tracks, in center of photo is
fire damaged buildings, and residents in the area
Q: look at exhibit 212B, do you recognize
A: yes, close up of aerial photo
Q: did you find incendiary devices at location
A: yes
Q: how many
A: three
Q: what was the condition of the devices found
A: number 1 was intact, number 2 was partially burned, number 3 burnt
remains Q: identify exhibit 212C
A: shed that was burned
Q: what perspective was shown
A: open to the west side, burn building to the back
Q: identify exhibit 212D
A: inside shed, incendiary device and accelerant
Q: identify exhibit 212E
A: close up view of same area
Q: did you study this device
A: yes
Q: how does it work
A: 60 minute wind up timer, with red straw attached to handle of timer, Q:
why is straw attached to handle
A: when timer comes to zero straw pushes bare wires together
Q: what happens when you join these wires
A: completes a circuit through the battery to the light bulb to the
matches Q: what happens when current flows through light bulb
A: as current passes through the light bulb which has the glass bulb
removed it ignites the matches that spreads to other matches then to
sponge soaked in fuel spreading to main fuel supply
Q: identify exhibit 212g
A: five gallon plastic bucket found at site
Q: anything significant about this bucket
A: it was painted black, had the smell of gas
Q: identify exhibit 212H
A: interior of bucket
Q: anything inside
A: liquid small amount
Q: any smell
A: yes, petroleum/gas, took two samples, sent to lab
Q: any other liquid found in building
A: yes petroleum mixed with soap or detergent
Q: identify exhibit 212I
A: west side of wear house and south west of office
Q: where was device number 2
A: left center of photo and then right
Objection/leading witness
Jury asked to leave
Judge speaks to defense council, instructs to make objections when they
cound Jury returns
Q: identify exhibit 212L
A: photo taken of south west exterior of building, several items found
there: remains of fire case, remains of red plastic container, remains of
a green sponge, remains of a plastic container, remains of a battery,
remains of a timer.
Q: any similarities to other device
A: yes, same design
Q: identify exhibit 212M
A: aerial photo of main building
Q: identify exhibit 212N
A: close up where device number 3 was located
Q: what are red spots in photo
A: red flags placed in location of items found during examination of site
Q: what is black streak on building
A: unusual fire pattern
Q: what is unusual about it
A: damage wider at top, no evidence of pre existing debris found, device
found in area
Q: identify exhibit 212O
A: close up of red flagged areas, red flagged area where evidence was
found: nine volt battery, wire, remains of plastic bucket, five gallon
container
Q: any similarities found
A: yes
Q: did you interview Craig Rosebraugh
Objection/sustained
Q: did you speak with Rosebraugh
A: yes
Q: identify exhibit 213
A: document from Rosebraugh, communiqué from ALF claiming responsibility
for fire.
Q: read second sentence
A: 35 gallons of diesel gel brought by team…
Q: read the fifth line
A: next large holes drilled in walls to bypass alarms
Q: read following sentence
A: two teams poured gel into holes…
Q: was there any follow up investigation
A: yes, based on communiqué on hole drilling, revisited site
Q: back to exhibit 212L
A: photo shows hole in upper right side of building
Q: did you collect anything here
A: yes, gelled sample sent to lab
Q: how much damage at site
A: 1.2 million dollars
Q: identify area of origin
A: near device number 2, device ignited flammable substances
Q: did you investigate BLM horse corral
A: yes
Q: what is BLM
A: Bureau of Land Management
Q: when did you arrive at the scene
A: day after fire
Q: what did you learn
A: at 8 am. It was discovered the lock on gate was replaced, original lock
cut off, found on ground, smoke in the area
Q: tell about the scene
A: barn was destroyed, john deer tractor near barn, two devices near
tractor not ignited, fence was cut, horses escaped
Q: identify exhibit 221
A: diagram of pole barn
Q: describe the barn
A: 96 feet long, metal roof, in the left corner tack room, in the center
is an office and a bathroom, 325 square feet
Q: identify exhibit 221 page 2
A: close up photo of office area
Q: identify exhibit 222A
A: photo of the entrance gate
Q: identify exhibit 222B
A: photo of the tractor and to the left the remains of the pole parn Q:
identify exhibit 222E
A: photo of area under tractor where device was found
Q: identify exhibit 222F
A: close up of previous photo
Q: where the two devices found near tractor similar
A: yes, only difference was they used a super match
Q: identify exhibit 222G
A: the interior cab of the tractor
Q: why is this photo significant
A: shows ignitable substance spread/splattered around cab, ignition
component, timing mechanism with battery, wire, alligator clips, super
match, sponge and 1 gallon container of fuel
Q: how do these devices compare to others
A: there more sophisticated
Q: identify exhibit 222H
A: photo of timer and gallon jug
Q: why are the wires cut
A: upon discovery wires were cut for safety
Q: identify exhibit 222I
A: close up of timer
Q: explain what has been done
A: timer has nine volt battery connected to right snap, wire insulation
has been removed…toothpick taped to handle
Q: why did this device not go off
A: wires did not connect
Q: identify exhibit 222J
A: close up of sponge, matchbook, alligator clips from nine volt
battery/timer, bare wires, books of matches, yellow sponge
Q: identify exhibit 222K
A: close up of book of matches
Q: was it found in this condition
A: no, matches have been peeled back to expose rocket igniter,
Q: identify exhibit 222L
A: fire damaged barn
Q: identify exhibit 222M
A: destruction of pole barn
Q: can you seen the roof in the picture
A: yes
Q: identify exhibit 222Q
A: photo after metal roof was removed to expose side of office
Q: did you use accelerant k9
A: yes, dog named decan alerted officers to side of office and came to
area beside door
Q: how does this relate
A: found remains of devices in this area
Q: identify exhibit 222O
A: two items, remains of a nine volt batters and a metal spring from a 60
minute timer
Q: is this consistent with other evidence found
A: yes
Q: identify exhibit 222P
A: debris found in area marked D in diagram
Q: why is this significant
A: remains of nine volt battery and wires
Q: identify exhibit 222S
A: debris found near door of office
Q: explain significance
A: in upper left of photo is a metal spring and remains of paper matches
Q: where fluids tested
A: debris tested, no fluids were found
Q: did you receive communiqué from Rosebraugh
A: yes
Q: identify exhibit 223
A: copy of communiqué
Q: was this related to this arson
A: yes
Q: please read communiqué
A: in the spirit of crazy horse ALF/ELF join to…starting with horses teams
opened gates and barked like dogs to scatter horses…when the signal was
given incendiary devices were set…they escaped into the crisp night wind
Q: was this accurate to what you saw
A: yes
Q: how much damage
A: 193,000 dollars
Q: did you find cause of origin
A: yes, under pole barn, near office was the ignition of devices
Prosecutor says “I’m about to start another fire should we recess” Judge
“yes”
Court recess is 2:35 til 2:50 pm.

Italian Il Silvestre prisoner Costantino Ragusa Released

ELP Information Bulletin (14th of February 2008)

Dear friends

For Valentines Day we thought we'd like to bring you some good news for a change.

First off, ELP is delighted to announce that Italian Il Silvestre prisoner Costantino Ragusa (who was imprisoned accused of anti-GM crops, anti-multinational, and COR activity) has been released from prison under house arrest. Apparently there were some irregularities in the latest Il Silvestre trial (the anti-nuclear power trial) and so that trial has been nullified. A new trial for Costantino and all his co-defendants is expected in April.

However, despite Costantino's release, please remember to send support to the last two remaining Il Silvestre prisoners:

Daniele Casalini
Casa Circondariale
Via Burla 59
43100 Parma
Italy

Francesco Gioia
C.C. Sollicciano
Via Girolamo Minervini 2/R
50142 Firenze Sollicciano (FI)
Italy

Both are currently held on remand.

The second bit of good news is Belarussian anti-fascist prisoner Vlad Plyashkevich has been released on parole! This is great news. But again, please don't forget Vlad's co-defendent, Maks who remains in prison. The latest news on Maks is he might be released in May. Maks address is:

Maksim Gubskiy
ul. Batova-4 VK-2 otd.21
213800 Bobruysk
Belarus


Happy Valentines Day everyone!


+++++++++++++++++++++

Earth Liberation Prisoners Support Network
BM Box 2407
London
WC1N 3XX
England
www.spiritoffreedom.org.uk

Trial begins for accused lookout in arson at UW horticulture building


By Hal Bernton

Seattle Times staff reporter

TACOMA — The federal trial of an alleged Earth Liberation Front arsonist
got under way today, with prosecutors and defense attorneys offering
starkly different portraits of the 32-year-old violin teacher accused of
helping plan and carry out the May 2001 fire that caused more than $1.5
million in damage to the University of Washington Center for Urban
Horticulture.

U.S. Assistant Attorney Andrew Friedman, in opening statements, said that
Briana Waters was part of a five-person team that attacked the building in
the mistaken belief that a UW professor was conducting genetic engineering
of poplar trees. They built firebombs and in the pre-dawn hours used
timing devices and a bucket of fuel to set off a blaze.

"What the defendant and her accomplices did that night was wrong in every
way," said Friedman, who described Waters as a lookout who hid in the
bushes and watched for police while others set the fire. "... If there was
one building in Seattle that helped the environment it was probably the
Center for Urban Horticulture."

Defense attorney Robert Bloom said his client has been falsely accused,
and portrayed the government's prosecution as a travesty that would
wrongly imprison Waters and separate her from a family that includes a
3-year-old daughter.

"Ms. Waters is innocent not because of some technicality," Bloom told a
12-person jury. "But because she was not involved with this group of
people in any arson, in any discussion of arson ... that's not what
happened."

The trial is expected to take a month. If convicted, Waters could face
prison for much of her life. She is charged with arson and using a
destructive device in a crime of violence, crimes which carry a combined
mandatory sentence of 35 years.

Waters is a former Evergreen State College student who now lives in
Oakland, Calif., where she teaches music and plays in a band.

This is the first trial for any of the 18 men and women indicted on
charges of involvement in the militant Pacific Northwest underground that
between 1996 and 2001 carried out more than a dozen acts of arson and
sabotage against targets deemed a threat to the environment or animals.
The attacks caused tens of millions of dollars in damage, and targets
included a slaughterhouse, timber-company headquarters and a ski lodge at
Vail, Colo.

Waters is not alleged to be a leader of the underground cells. But because
she has refused to accept a plea deal, she risks a courtroom verdict that
could stick her with by far the harshest prison term of anyone sentenced
to date.

Twelve other people have reached plea agreements, and, according to court
documents, their sentences are expected to range from probation to 13
years. Four others have fled from federal authorities. Bill Rodgers — an
alleged ringleader of the attacks — committed suicide after being taken
into custody in Arizona in 2005.

Prosecutors say that two other participants in the UW arson — Lacey
Phillabaum and Jennifer Kolar — both allege that Waters served as a
lookout, carrying a radio to communicate news of a policeman who had
passed in the vicinity as the attack was under way.

Prosecutors also told the jury that the FBI took from Kolar a folder
filled with newspaper articles about the Earth Liberation Front, including
an account of the UW fire.

"Hey girl, take a look at this," said the note that accompanied the
folder, along with a heart and the letter B, according to Friedman.

An FBI analysis indicated that a fingerprint on the folder belonged to
Waters, according to Friedman.

Bloom, the defense attorney, said the government case was built on
informants who have pledged their cooperation in order to receive reduced
sentences, with Kolar expected to receive from five to seven years and
Phillabaum from three to five.

Bloom, in his opening statement, sought to cast doubt on the reliability
of the prosecution witnesses. He said that the evidence will shows that
Kolar — in an important initial FBI interview — named herself and four
other participants in the arson, but didn't mention Waters. Only later,
did Kolar change her story, and say that Waters was a participant.

"What kind of person are they relying on to convict Briana Waters, who had
nothing to do with it? Bloom said.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Avelino Gonzalez Claudio-Newest PRican Political Prisoner

The ProLibertad Freedom Campaign

ProLibertad@hotmail.com and ProLibertad.campaign@gmail.com

http://www.myspace.com/ProLibertad

ProLibertad Hotline: 718-601-4751

The ProLibertad Freedom Campaign denounces the arrest of Avelino GOnzalez Claudio; the newest PUERTO RICAN POLITICAL PRISONER!!

ProLibertad organized a very militant and powerful picket infront of 26 Federal Plaza!!

Write to him:

Avelino Gonzalez-Claudio #09873-000
MDC Guaynabo
P.O. Box 2005
Catano, PR 00963

Below is an AP article on his hearing on Monday and the a statment from his support committee...

Durante la tarde de ayer se llevó a cabo en la corte yanki en Puerto Rico la vista de identificación y extradición del compañero Avelino González Claudio.

El compañero fue acusado en agosto de 1985 junto a otros compañeros y compañeras patriotas por la expropiación de $7 millones de dólares de la Wells Fargo en Hartford, CT. Desde ese entonces estuvo en el clandestinaje.

Adjuntamos la declaración que durante la tarde de ayer el compañero presentó frente al magistrado López. Próximamente se informará sobre el Comité de Familiares y Amigos de Avelino González Claudio.


Associated Press
Feb. 11, 2008

Although presumed Machetero Avelino González Claudio requested that he be
tried in Puerto Rico and declared himself a “political prisoner,” federal
magistrate Marcos López ordered his extradition to Hartford, Connecticut,
in a generally automatic judicial proceeding.

González Claudio’s lawyer also denounced to the judge that his client is
receiving “inhumane treatment” en the federal prison, because he is being
held in a cell where the only window has been sealed with a sheet of metal
so he can’t see daylight.

Migdalia Torres, spokeswoman for MDC Guaynabo, stated in a letter written
to Associated Press that some cells in the prison are being repaired, and
that this work could require that the windows be temporarily sealed. She
denied that González Claudio is receiving special or different treatment
than the rest of the prisoners.

“The treatment of prisoner González Claudio is no different than that any
other detainee awaiting trial and with the same security needs,” Torres
declared in the letter.

González Claudio was arrested last week for allegedly participating in the
$7 million Wells Fargo robbery in Hartford, CT, on Sept. 12, 1983.

González Claudio stated that he responds to that name, although he
established through his legal representation that he does not recognize
the authority of the U.S. court in Puerto Rico to extradite him.

Avelino González Claudio does not deny his identity. This Puerto Rican
citizen in front of you is Avelino González Claudio,” Juan Ramón Acevedo
Cruz, lead defense attorney for the supposed member of the Boricua
People’s Army-Machetero, stated to magistrate Lopez.

“In terms of extradition, we vigorously object to any attempt by the U.S.
government to remove González Claudio from his home, Puerto Rico,” added
the attorney during the accused’s identification hearing.

Federal prosecutor Jose Ruiz indicated to AP that the extradition could
take more than 20 days and that if no bail is imposed in the jurisdiction
to which he will be transferred, he would remain incarcerated. “If bail is
imposed here, it is usually respected there,” Ruiz indicated.

According to Acevedo, González Claudio, as a “political prisoner,” demands
his right to remain in his home country, as stated by international law.

The attorney also demanded that the U.S. government comply with UN General
Assembly Resolution 1514, which declares colonialism to be “the negation
of a fundamental human right.”

“Since 1972, the UN Special Decolonization Committee has recognized the
inalienable right of Puerto Ricans to self-determination and independence
according to Resolution 1514,” added the attorney, citing the resolution.

The defense also requested a bail hearing, which was set by the magistrate
for Feb. 21 at 1:30 in the afternoon.

The federal prosecutor’s office, represented by Ruiz and Carlos Cardona,
did not object to guaranteeing the suspect’s bail hearing.

They successfully requested that González Claudio remain incarcerated in
MDC Guaynabo because he is considered “a flight risk” and “a danger to the
community” because he used false names for 22 years and due to the nature
of the crimes he is accused of.

The magistrate stated that the denunciation of inhumane treatment is not
under the court’s jurisdiction.

Faced with the attorney’s demands that he be able to visit González
Claudio in a visiting room and not in a conference room where they have no
privacy, and that his shackles be removed so he can sign documents, the
magistrate responded that the attorney would have to make the pertinent
arrangements with the federal BOP. He indicated that the tribunal could
only intervene if the situation persisted.

While the hearing was taking place, there was a protest by independence
organizations outside the federal building in Hato Rey.

“This court represents the interests of the empire and they will
faithfully follow the orders of Washington, but we are going to fight all
the legal battles so he can remain here,” expressed the accused’s brother,
Osvaldo González Claudio. He added that he hopes his brother will be tried
“by his peers” and not in Connecticut.

Prosecutor calls woman accused of UW arson an 'extremist'

By PAUL SHUKOVSKY
P-I REPORTER

TACOMA -- A 32-year-old violin teacher and mother was portrayed Tuesday by
a federal prosecutor as a member of an extremist Earth Liberation Front
cell that "blazed a trail of destruction across Oregon and Washington."

Briana Waters is charged with playing a role in the torching of the Center
for Urban Horticulture in May 2001, which ELF hoped would set back
research into genetically altered trees.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew Friedman told jurors in his opening
statement that the gov