[Imc-newsroom] Wed. PM Staley Trial Report

[Mike Lehman]

I arrived at the Courthouse and went through security.
Courthouse is paneled in the arrogance of power.
Courtroom was officially closed, but the defendants and their attorneys
had free rein--you gotta trust cops, right? I sit outside until the
bailiff invites me to enter.

Trial gets underway at 1:30 in the afternoon; I think this is probably
the regular time for anyone anticipating covering afternoons.

Jerry Tucker resumes his testimony. Discussion of his involvement in
planning of the June 25, 1994 march/rally. How term "War Zone" came into
being? Jerry says because all the employers were waging war on the
workers at the same time. He notes that all panning for the march was
strictly for an orderly march and a well-defined front line- there was
NO plan to break through the police line, but he hears that part of the
union executive board was planning non-violent civil disobedience, which
he eventually decides to join in. The parade marshalls, including him,
were all wearing signs that said "I believe in non-violent civil
disobedience" or bore the International Declaration of Human Rights
(which include the often-ignored-in-the-US right to a job and a union)
to identify themselves. He marched to the Staley Admin building and then
proceeded with folks to the 21st St. gate at Staley (later identified as
the scab gate).

The video is watched again and Jerry identifies himself in it. He wasn't
right in the middle of where the people tripped and fell as they were
sprayed by the hair-triggered cops, but gets a goodly dose of OC (oleo
capsican) that blinds him for 15-20 minutes. Somebody hands him a wet
t-shirt to wipe his face and eyes with. He didn't see the second spray,
for obvious reasons, but could hear other people in the crowd talking
about it when it occurred.

Pat Landragon gets up for the defense to cross-examine Jerry. The fellow
looks a lot like another now-famous Decatur resident, Mark Whitacre of
ADM scandal fame. He starts off by asking Jerry about the coordination
of the efforts by the different unions at Staley, Cat, and
Bridgestone/Firestone, making it seem like he's hoping to discover some
vast conspiracy of the working class. Makes an issue of "War Zone"
terminology. Keeps repeating questions that somehow imply Jerry could
read the minds of the 2,000 people in the crowd and control them or
otherwise be responsible for anything they might do. Keeps asking if
Jerry could remember hearing chants of "Don't be afraid to cross the
line". Jerry can't be sure about that, but he distinctly remembers
hearing "Scabs Out, Union In" throughout the day's events. Landragon
makes a big deal about the union media being present (but says nothing
about corproate media, interestingly enough).

The next lawyer in cross-exam of Jerry by the defense (maybe Pat Klaus?)
makes lame questions about violence, but seems most concern about the
potential for violence against PROPERTY (maybe that's why these guys are
in the courtroom-becuase of their warped sense of values?). This quickly
escalates to questions about dynamite throwing, at which point the judge
strikes his lame accusations as being "without foundation in the record"
and advise the jury to disregard them. 2nd lawyer sits down after his
line of questioning fizzles of its own stupidity.

The plaintiff's attorney is direct at redirect exam. Asks Jerry about
the goals of the labor movement that day. Jerry says they were definitly
for non-violence as violence would be counter-productive for the workers
cause.

Defense rises again and makes a big deal of the fact that Jerry
"couldn't know the goals of the other 2,000 people." Jerry steps down.

Debra Garrett steps up. She attended the June 25, 1994 rally because she
comes from a labor family (although with no ties to Staley) and wants to
show her kids the struggle of the workers for their rights. She had
attended several rallies during that time and thought this would be just
another one like them, but was shocked to see all  the cops in riot gear
this time. She saw the people falling in front of her and her children,
then took her kids across the street to get them away from the OC. The
OC was burning her face and theirs. Plaintiff's attorney trys to get
testimony from her about her children's suffering, but objections from
the defense kill that. The jury is taken out while showing of the video
clip of her is discussed.  Time for her to identify herself on the
video. The video clearly shows her son grasping at his eyes and makes
the agony plainly apparent to those in the courtroom.

Cops are discussing among themselves with attorneys their concerns about
the 1st Amendment violations this may depict, before the jury is brought
back in to view the video, which they do next.

(Before the jury returns, I have time to slip out to the john. Bathrooms
are nice and clean. Water fountain is gold-plated, but lacks any cooling
for the water.)

More semi-hostile questions on crossexam. More questions about whether
she had heard the "cross the line" chants that the defense seems so
concerned about.

Other defense lawyer asks if she would have sat down at the demo, got in
the face of cops, etc. She says no. Note: there was about a 4 foot gap
between the line of cops and protesters obvious in most of the videos,
so I think he is exagerating what went on at the line to aid his case.
Ms. Garrett steps down.

Joanne Wypijewski takes stand. She was managing editor of "The Nation"
at the time. She descibes attending a meeting in a park where the
planning for the CD was finalized. It was clear that there would be NO
resistance to the cops from those who might choose to cross the line for
arrest. She follows march to Staley Admin building, then goes ahead to
21st St. gate. She sees cop push Dan Lane, a worker, with his baton. Mr.
Lane sits down; others sit down around him. Then cops started spraying.
She used her camera, both as a journalistic reflex and to partially
shield herself from the OC spray. She could sense the crowd backing off
as the cops sprayed, but heard no orders by the police, either to
disperse or to spray the OC.

Landragon begins crossexam. Wants to know background of "The Nation".
Joanne says oldest political magazine in the US-100,000 subscribers.
Lawyer notes shes a part of the suit, since she got indirectly sprayed
also. He asks if unions advertise in the Nation. Joanne says yes, but
"not as much as we would like." She steps down.

Commander Ryan of Decatur police takes stand. In 1994, he was a Lt. and
was in charge of "Professional Standards" and was commander of the
Emergency Response Team (ERT). He was scene commander at the 21st St.
gate and personally sprayed protesters that day. He claims there was
only one incident of direct face spraying that day, but conceded that
the cops had generally been spraying "at folks at face height." Much
testimony that the union had met with police numerous times to
coordinate and keep the protests orderly; that the union wanted to avoid
trouble; and that they helped the union set up the "Chaplain" system as
parade marshalls so that the union could keep their folks orderly and
prevent provocatuers from infiltrating into their ranks.

The Operation Order for the protest was prepared by Lt. Ryan himself on
June 23rd and he admitted that they knew by then, two days before the
protest, that there would be CD on the 25th, and that they had found
this out from sources "other than the union."(maybe illegal
surveillance?) The order indicates that Dave Watts (local union
president) wanted to keep the march non-violent and peaceful-that the
union would do everything in its power to make it so, but obviously
couldn't guarantee that.

Comdr. Ryan said that the Decatur ERT team "goes beyond the SWAT team in
concept." Said that they view themselves as a "crack" (elite) unit, but
refused to directly admit they were paramilitary in nature. He was asked
about the uniforms they wore and said they were BDUs. The attorney for
the plaintiffs asked what that acronym meant. He claimed he didn't know,
despite being a military veteran. (BTW, BDU stands for Battle Dress
Uniform- I bet he knew this but wanted them to seem like "peace-loving"
sort of guys by avoiding mentioning those words.) It is established that
the ERT is not primarily trained to be a crowd control unit (he said
they did a lot of warrant services i.e. they break people's doors down
in the Drug War), but noted they were getting quite a bit of practice at
that with all the protests during that time frame.

There then develops some controversy about a fine legal disticntion.
Jury is taken out. Then a brief dust-up occurs when the plaintiffs note
that the OP Order that Lt. Ryan prepared indicates the Illinois State
Police were under the command of the Decatur Police. The defense
attorney representing the State Police objects to this, even though it
is plainly stated in the record-"The State Police NEVER surrender
command authority" to other units of government. This seems unresolved
and is rather interesting now that the Champaign Police Dept has an
agreement with Decatur's ERT-who'll REALLY be in charge when they get
together, especially with the State Police involved? This is the kind of
deniable authority that spawns death squads in other countries.

Jury brought back in. More stuff from the plan indicates that the
marchers would be allowed to occupy the street, even though that would
technically be illegal. There would only be an order to disperse if
violence or property damage occurred, then the commander would have
discretion to use OC if order to disperse was ignored. It is noted that
this also applied to the snow fence guarding the Staley Admin building,
that no one violated it, and that there was not a line of police there.
It is noted that there were probably 100 Decatur police on duty that
day, with 11 in the ERT at 21st St. gate, 50 on standby nearby, and the
rest on traffic details or regular patrols. There were 24 Macon County
deputies standing by. Comdr. Ryan refused to say how many State Police
other than "many" (I know it was a bunch, as I was listening on the
scanner that day and these guys were headed to Decatur from all over the
state).

If protesters were to sit or lie down, they would be videotaped, but no
action was to be taken, unless ordered by the scene commander (Lt.
Ryan). Asked if the union was aware that OC might be used, he said there
were no specific warnings given about that then, but that the cops had
discussed this with the union before and indicated that this was known
to them, as they had given the union the MSDS (OSHA-required warning
info for industrial chemicals) for the OC, plus other literature on it.

Decatur police were governed by two policies re OC. One was the overall
use of force" policy, the other a specific policy on use of OC only. It
is noted that OC is classified as a munition. With that, it was 4:30pm
and time to quit for the day.

I walked home and opened the front door of my house to the stinging
sensation of OC in the air. No cops at my place-I'm drying Habenero
peppers from my garden in a dehydrator, but it was a fitting end to
today's experince at the Federal Courthouse in Urbana, IL.

Mike Lehman