Activists accused in violent animal rights protests say their free speech rights are under attack

By Jennifer Squires - Sentinel Staff Writer

Posted: 03/19/2009 Mercury News

SAN JOSE - Four animal rights activists indicted by a federal grand jury for their alleged roles in violent demonstrations at the homes of UC biomedical researchers pleaded not guilty today, then held a rally denouncing what they call an attack on free speech rights.

Joseph Buddenberg, Maryam Khajavi, Nathan Pope and Adriana Stumpo are being charged under the relatively new Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a 2006 law aimed at terrorism against scientists and others involved in using animals in their research. The San Jose charges are believed to be the second case in the nation brought under AETA, approved by Congress to "prosecute animal rights extremists" with a tougher law that includes stiffer penalties.

At the rally, which occurred just outside the federal courthouse downtown, supporters waved signs that called the law - known as AETA - unconstitutional. Some signs dubbed the four defendants the "AETA 4."

Well-known civil rights lawyer Tony Serra, who is representing Khajavi, said his client and the other defendants are idealist kids whose free-speech rights are being curtailed. Punishing youth for dissenting leads to the downfall of a society, Serra said.

"We represent the voice of tomorrow," he said.

Authorities say the activists are linked to the alleged crimes through video surveillance footage and fliers seized by federal agents in which they pledged violence against the researchers for using animals in experiments.

a two-count indictment filed March 12, prosecutors cite three specific protests, including a February 2008 incident outside the home of a UCSC professor in which demonstrators shook doors and hit the professor's husband with thrown objects. According to court papers, protesters, wearing bandanas to hide their faces, yelled, "We're gonna get you." The animal terror act prohibits "force, violence and threats involving animal enterprises."

In addition to the attempted home invasion attack of a UCSC researcher a year ago the four are accused of being involved in several demonstrations at the homes of UC Berkeley researchers in late 2007 and early 2008. No one has been charged in the most egregious of the animal rights protests - the July firebombings of two UCSC scientists' homes.

Robert Bloom, the attorney for Buddenberg, 25, said the government's case seems weak. The demonstrators were simply denouncing people who were terrorizing animals.

"This is not intimidation," Bloom said. "This is not threats. This is exposing people who are believed to be torturers."

Challenging the constitutionality of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act will be a part of the defense, according to the defense attorneys. The law is vague and violates free speech rights, Bloom said.

"It's really deplorable," he said.

Khajavi was the only defendant to speak at the rally. Reading from a prepared statement, the 20-year-old UC Santa Cruz graduate said she has never been in trouble before and is only being punished for trying to express her point of view.

"I'm a victim of free speech suppression," she said.

In court Thursday, the judge issued conditional release terms for Pope and Stumpo, who were arrested last month in North Carolina as they returned from a trip to Costa Rica. Pope, 26, was a one-time Cabrillo College student who lives in Oceanside. Stumpo, 23, had attended UCSC and now lives in Long Beach. Unlike the other defendants, Pope and Stumpo will be allowed to contact each other - but not discuss the case pending against them - because they are engaged, the judge decided.

About 40 people, most of them young and casually dressed, packed into the courtroom to watch the proceedings in front of Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd.

The defendants, all free on $20,000 bonds, return to court April 16. Defense attorneys are waiting for the prosecutor from the U.S. Attorney's Office to turn over evidence, including several DVD and reports from police and the FBI.

Serra said he anticipates the case will go to jury trial. It could take as long as two years to adjudicate, he said.

In court papers, federal prosecutors insist the defendants "conspired to use force, violence or threats to interfere with the operation of the University of California" and its animal research programs.

California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein co-sponsored the 2006 legislation, citing a number of violent protests at California research facilities, including a string of attacks at UC San Francisco between 2001 and 2005, and the 2003 firebombing at the Chiron Corp. in Emeryville.

The only other reported case the Justice Department has pressed under the domestic terrorism statute was the 2006 prosecution of seven animal rights activists in New Jersey. A federal appeals court in Philadelphia earlier this year heard arguments on a free speech challenge to the law in that case, a ruling that could serve as a test for whatever unfolds in the San Jose prosecution.