St. Patrick's Four Not Guilty of Conspiracy;

For Immediate Release

St. Patrick's Four Not Guilty of Conspiracy;

Mon Sep 26, 2005 18:05

64.140.158.92

For Immediate Release
September 26, 2005
St. Patrick's Four Not Guilty of Conspiracy; Charged with
Misdemeanors

(9/26/05 -- BINGHAMTON, NY) Members of the St. Patrick's Four, their
families, friends and legal team were grateful to learn that the
jury, after over seven hours of deliberation, had found the peace
activists not guilty of the most serious charge, conspiracy to
impede an officer of the United States.

"The decision to acquit on the conspiracy charge, a felony, is a
huge victory, given the narrow parameters within which the four
could present their defense, and given the restrictions on
deliberations. This is a major setback in the government's efforts
to criminalize dissent," said Bill Quigley, acclaimed public
interest lawyer and law professor at Loyola University School of
Law, who has been acting as legal advisor to the defendants.

The four were convicted on lesser charges, damage to property and
trespassing, both misdemeanors which carry possible sentences of one
year and six months respectively.

"Regardless of the penalties, we will continue to call for justice
for the Iraqi people and our troops," stated Daniel Burns, one of
the four defendants. "We know our principled dissent now represents
the majority of the public, and we're inspired by the jury's
decision to refuse the government's attempt at intimidation."

The decision did not surprise the defendants, given Senior U.S.
District Judge Hon. Thomas J. McAvoy forbade them to present to the
jury the legal context, particularly international treaties and the
US Constitution, which would have made possible and reasonable an
acquittal on all charges.

"Our actions were lawful, however, we were repeatedly denied the
chance to explain why," stated Teresa Grady, one of the
defendants. "We were not allowed to mention Article VI, paragraph
four of the Constitution, which says that the treaties of the United
States are the supreme law of the land. We were not allowed to
explain our actions in the context of the Nuremberg Principles,
which declare that citizens can be held responsible for crimes of
their government. Nor could we explain how this war was a violation
of the UN Charter. The jury made a wise choice with what they had.
It's unfortunate, however, that they were denied the full truth."

In a previous trial in Tompkins County Court in April 2004, the
defendants were able to fully explain their action in this broader
legal context, and nine of twelve jurors voted to acquit.

"The real crime, as we've always stated, is that our government
conspired against the American people and lied us into an illegal
and immoral war," said Peter DeMott, a member of the St. Patrick's
Four. "The task is now upon us all to better understand the
criminality of our government's aggression and, as citizens, to act
accordingly to demand that our government adheres to international
law."

Clare Grady, another co-defendant, said, "Our work is just
beginning. We all must continue to speak on behalf of the victims of
this criminal war -- the innocent Iraqi civilians, US
servicemembers, and indeed all of humanity. Whether it's Crawford or
Binghamton or Washington or beyond, our dissent will not be
silenced. Truth, justice, and peace will prevail."

Sentencing has been scheduled for late January of next year. And
though three of the four defendants were held in contempt, Judge
McAvoy said that he'd make a decision on the penalties in due
course.

Posted

http://stpatricksfour.com/

=============================

St. Patrick's Four Trial Coverage

Ahhh, I love the smell of Patriotic Dissent in the afternoon —By David Swanson, Mon Sep 26 20:13

Saturday’s war protest draws 100,000-150,000 —Randi Roads Show, Mon Sep 26 20:37