Recent and Upcoming Local News

New Orleans group Common Ground Collective Asks Ithacans to join 'Road trip for Relief'

But these small successes in the most visible parts of town tell only part of the story. A closer look in many areas provides a far more sobering picture. Basic services remain months, if not years, away from re-establishment. Schools aren’t set to reopen for another year, as buildings are damaged and filthy, and children are scarce, few having been able to safely return home with their families.

Throughout Eastern New Orleans and in the 9th Ward, electric power has yet  to be restored. Thousands of homes remain untouched, their former occupants either unable or unwilling to return. And for those who do come back, the work to clean up and restore their homes will become a full-time, unpaid job. Mold and toxins coat the walls, sometimes even the ceilings. Water has irreparably destroyed furniture, clothes, and other possessions. In the kitchens stand refrigerators and freezers filled with food that has been rotting since August, leaking onto floors and creating a health hazard of putridity that would turn the strongest stomach.

Animals still lie dead in gutters and on sidewalks and yards, their remains so decomposed and dessicated that the skeletons and tattered fur no longer even stink. Street signs blown down by the winds of Katrina or Rita have not been replaced, so now those unfamiliar with the city-wide system of one-way streets frequently drive at top speeds the wrong way down thoroughfares, flying across bridges and overpasses with only blind chance to prevent the further loss of life in head-on collisions. Police and National Guard units patrol deserted neighborhoods on the lookout for looters. Roofs are still torn and damaged, and a mercifully dry October is the only thing protecting the few salvageable possessions on shelves or cabinets of many homes.

Beyond these immediate issues, more insidious forces are at work to undermine people’s right to return and keep them out of their homes or apartments. Evictions, both legal and illegal, have begun throughout the city. New Orleans housing stock has been decimated, and the livable units that remain are in high demand. Accordingly, rents have increased two- to three-fold, while unemployment has shot up to 15%. Ruthless landlords are seizing upon the chaos to deny people access to their homes and belongings, and are trying to clear out old tenants in order to quickly cash in on the housing shortage. Especially vulnerable to this are the city’s Latino families, for whom language is often a barrier and to whom the Louisiana legal system is an inscrutable maze.

Despite this somber reality, though, groups of people have come together from within the city and from around the country to restore communities to clean up trashed and damaged homes, to fight evictions and demand due process for tenants faced now with even more upheaval.

One such group is the Common Ground Relief collective. Initially organized in the less-ravaged Algiers parish, across the river from the rest of the city, Common Ground’s first priority has been to distribute food, water, bleach and cleaning supplies, clothing and other essentials to residents repairing their homes. Recently, a second distribution site has been established in the Upper 9th Ward, a majority black community long neglected by city hall, where flood damage is severe.

Every day, hundreds of residents of the 9th Ward rely on Common Ground’s distribution center to feed themselves and their families, to get cleaning supplies, and to stock up on protective gear so they can safely enter their houses. A free first-aid station now operates around the clock, providing the only basic medical services available for miles. And at the same 9th Ward site, a legal clinic is up and running, providing people with bi-lingual information and advocacy to fight evictions. The legal clinic also counsels people dealing with police brutality and harassment, and offers assistance in filling out FEMA relief applications.

Common Ground’s operations are carried out by scores of volunteers, and made possible only by the generous donations of hundreds of people. But more is needed, and will be needed for some time to come. Volunteers are crucial to the effort to support New Orleans residents struggling to re-establish their lives, and donations of material and money are vital to keep the effort going. Common Ground is hosting a “Road Trip for Relief” during the week of November 20-27, to bring volunteers and supplies to the hardest-hit parts of Louisiana to assist in repairing, rebuilding, and renewing communities that have suffered tremendous loss. People with skills ranging from electrical work and roof repair to crisis counselling and medical care are greatly needed now. Volunteers with any skill set and any experience are welcome to the Common Ground Collective, and the efforts made to help the people of New Orleans now will make a huge difference in the shape of the region’s future.

Support Common Ground’s mission. Come to New Orleans and volunteer, or check the Common Ground website www.commongroundrelief.org to find out how you can donate money or equipment. Get involved. The support you can give is vital to make New Orleans a better, safer place for all of its people.

The trial of the St. Patricks Four came to a close today. The jury began
deliberation at approximately 1 p.m. Friday and were told to go home for
the weekend at 7 p.m after six hours of deliberation (perhaps a good
sign?!?) In any event, the following Closing Statment from Bill Quigley,
assisting attorney at the trial. It is incredible. Many more details of
the trial can be found at www.stpatricksfour.org
In solidarity
Pete

Bill Quigley (speaking as assisting lawyer for Clare Grady), Closing
Statement, Friday, September 23, 2003
Reasons -- 10 KEYS to FREEDOM; 10 ways to help you find these four people
innocent:

Being a juror is tough -- I was on regular jury duty for a month and grand
jury for another month -- spent most of the time waiting around doing
nothing -- really boring. But now FINALLY comes the fun part -- YOU are in
charge!

The judge is going to give you about 50 pages of instructions about how
you are to decide this case -- some of it is very vague and hard to
understand -- in fact the judge and the lawyers have been arguing about
much of it for days.

I want to be clear that you do not have to agree with these four folks in
order to find them not guilty. You can think even think they are nuts and
still find them not guilty.

Individual freedom is at stake -- what you do in this case will send out
waves throughout the entire community -- maybe even the entire country --
so I know you will be a good citizen, and whether you like these folks and
their beliefs or think they are peaceniks and do not like them, I know you
will be very very careful with individual freedom.

You certainly have a gut feeling whether you are going to want to vote
these folks guilty or not guilty right now. For those of you who are
leaning towards not guilty,

Here though are the top 10 keys to unlock this case and give these people
back their freedom.

These are 10 keys why you should find these folks innocent -- any one will
work as key for their freedom but I am giving you 10 so you can take your
pick.

ONE: Start with "the presumption of innocence" and "beyond a reasonable
doubt"

They start out innocent. Fundamental part of our system of justice --
until you are sure "beyond a reasonable doubt" that they are guilty, you
have to find them not guilty.

If you are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that every single
element of every single crime has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt,
then you you must vote them not guilty for those crimes.

If you are not sure beyond a reasonable doubt that they are guilty of
every single element of every single crime, then you must vote them not
guilty.

TWO: There was NO CRIMINAL INTENT.

The judge is going to tell you that the good faith of the defendants is a
defense to these charges:

"If you find that the defendant did not act with criminal intent, but
instead acted in the good faith belief that he (or she) was doing nothing
wrong, then that is a defense to the charge in this case..." (JUDGE SAYING
THIS TO YOU, NOT ME) and "The burden of establishing a lack of good faith
and criminal intent rests on the prosecution...WHICH MUST PROVE IT BEYOND
A REASONABLE DOUBT.

What the heck does all this about criminal intent mean?

These folks all have jobs, all have kids, they are obviously sincere and
passionate about their beliefs.

Any doubt that they are TOTALLY COMMITTED TO NONVIOLENCE or would lie
about it? No way. Look at the priests and others who came up here and
testified about their character -- compassionate, caring, integrity,
truthful, honest, loved, honored, ....

You know I am from New Orleans. I want to tell you two stories that will
illustrate criminal intent.

When the electricity went off and the phones went down and the water
started rising, my wife and I were still in New Orleans -- she is a nurse
and we were helping in one of the hospitals.

During the bad times, some people broke into stores and took big screen
TVs. We call them looters because they had criminal intent.

Also during the storm, all communications went down because of electrical
problems and cell phone towers also went down. The police could not
communicate with the mayor and the mayor with the governor and them all
with the FEMA etc. so the chief of police and several of his officers
broke into an Office Depot and took out servers for computers, fax
machines, cords, etc.

From the outside you might say these are both the same types of acts, but
they are not. One of them was larceny and one was not. One has criminal
intent and the other does not.

One of those acts was taken for the common good. One of these was trying
to help people. It is important whether the equipment the police took
actually worked or not? No, it is their intent that matters.

So, reason number two is that the defendants did not have CRIMINAL INTENT.
And the prosecutor, who has the burden of proof clearly has not proved a
lack of good faith and the presence of criminal intent by these people
beyond a reasonable doubt.

The judge will tell you - If you have reasonable doubt about whether their
intent was criminal or not, if you think they might have been in good
faith, you must vote them not guilty.

THREE: CAREFUL LOOK AT ALL THE 50 PAGES OF INSTRUCTIONS

You will find many, many ways to find them all innocent if you look
carefully at ALL the charging documents:

You must look very carefully at the indictment of these people -- it will
be in the 50 pages -- look at it very, very carefully.

Careful reading of the charges will show you many, many places where the
prosecutor has not proven every element beyond a reasonable doubt.

Carefully at the overt acts.

Carefully at the statute.

In the first paragraph, the judge tells you that no one part of his
instructions are more important than any other. If you look very
carefully, there are things in there that will make you vote to set these
people free.

FOUR: THE POWER OF ONE JUROR

It only takes one juror to stop these people from being convicted.

Remember when the judge was asking you questions about becoming a juror,
he asked you if you were able to make up your own mind and not be swayed
by the crowd. To hang tough with your beliefs if you sincerely believe you
are right. Listen to everyone else and deliberate but vote your own
conscience.

Your decision has to be unanimous. You should discuss and deliberate as
the judge tells you, but you will also hear about the importance of
following your conscience -- the judge will tell you that you are not to
"do violence to your own individual judgment." So hang tough!

FIVE: NO FORCE INTIMIDATION OR THREAT

Force intimidation or threat -- two of the counts of conspiracy demand
that you find these folks acted with "force intimidation or threat" The
evidence shows they said prayers before they went in; said the rosary
while they were still in; no way at all for force intimidation or threat
-- you must vote not guilty on that.

Even Sgt. Montgomery said "they are friendly people."

There is no evidence, certainly not evidence beyond a reasonable doubt,
that these folks used force intimidation or threat against anyone at any
time.

SIX: COMMON SENSE & UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

Look at prosecutor's case for the unanswered questions and use your common
sense.

The judge is going to tell you "you are permitted to draw from facts that
you find to have been proven such reasonable inferences as seem justified
in light of your experience, reason and common sense."

Why would the prosecutor bring up things that happened 20+ years ago if
they thought they had a strong case?

Mr. Lovric is just doing his job, but think about the government he
represents.

Why do you think the government is assigning FBI agents to a case like
this?

Why is the government still prosecuting this case almost three years after
it happened?

Why did the government make a federal case out of a mess that could be
cleaned up with ammonia and a mop?

Why all the questions about who drew the blood?

Why try to keep talking motive and not intent?

Use your common sense when you answer these questions.

SEVEN: ENTRY FOR UNLAWFUL PURPOSE?

First of all, is there any doubt in your mind that these folks went into
the recruiting center in order to try to SAVE LIVES and to TRY TO STOP THE
WAR ON IRAQ? You know what the war has caused, was trying to stop it an
unlawful purpose?

Apart from the Iraq War, Remember the law officers said they unlocked the
door and opened it to let the Grady sisters back in? Why would they unlock
the door and let them in if they were not allowed in? Or coming for an
unlawful purpose? Or if the officers were fearful?

EIGHT: conspiracy charge -- there are pages and pages of instructions
about the elements of the charge of conspiracy.

But look closely and carefully at a couple of things and you will see that
the conspiracy charge is really much weaker than it looks like.

First, look at overt act number 5. The government says that these four
folks "caused damage to property owned by the united states AND by an
officer of the united states."

If you look at overt act five slowly and carefully you must ask: has the
government proven beyond a reasonable doubt that number one: there was
damage at all (was the floor damaged or was a mess made?)

Number two - Was property damaged that was owned by the US and an officer
of the United States? Was there proof of this ownership beyond a
reasonable doubt? was Sgt Montgomery injured by these folks? You saw his
demeanor in court. He said these were friendly people. Was his property
injured? No evidence at all that Sgt Montgomery's property was injured.
None -- nothing was proven that was injured that belonged to Sgt.
Montgomery. Much less beyond a reasonable doubt.

But then, the prosecutor will say -- they do not have to prove all the
overt acts -- they do not have to prove all the elements in the indictment
--

Was Sgt. Montgomery interfered with in his official duties? He said he was
late for shopping.

Officer Massey testified that recruiters are trained how to deal with
"peaceniks" in recruiting school, and that most of their work takes place
outside.

Why is the government making a federal case out of this and still
prosecuting these folks years afterwards?

 NINE: Injuring and damaging government property:

Is there proof beyond a reasonable doubt whose property was damaged?

Is damaged the same as making a mess? Did the people here do this for an
unlawful purpose, or is there evidence that they did this for a lawful
purpose?

 TEN: Conscience.

The court is going to advise you to honor and use and follow your
conscience.

You know what is going on here. It is no secret. Everyone knows what is
going on here. I ask you to use your common sense and your conscience.

The prosecutor says this is a simple case -- I think freedom loving people
call can agree with him.

This is a simple case of government overkill; this is a simple case of the
abuse of government power; this is a simple case of the government trying
to take a simple case of non-violent protest and make a "federal case" out
of it.

The government is calling these four people arrogant and unlawful and
dangerous.

These four people could have stayed home and watched shock and awe on tv.
They could have said this is somebody else's problem. They had jobs and
kids and school and church -- just like the rest of us -- but they were
peacemakers. What does the bible say? Blessed are the peacemakers.

But they took a risk. A risk to try to do something dramatic to try to
stop the war in Iraq.

The government is calling these four people arrogant and unlawful and
dangerous.

This is the same government which has forced us to accept the Patriot Act.

Who else have the people in charge called arrogant and unlawful and
dangerous?

How about the people who built this country and refused to pay taxes to
King George? I seem to remember a famous tea party protest?

How about the people who signed the Declaration of Independence?

Women who voted when it was prohibited -- what do you think they called
them?

What about the people who sat in at lunch counters or refused to move in
busses?

Many of the most famous people in the history of our country were called
arrogant and unlawful and dangerous people to some, because they acted for
justice when everyone did not approve -- much less the prosecutors and the
government.

The judge is going to tell you to follow your conscience. You know what is
going on.

Use any or all of these ten keys that this case gives you.

Follow your conscience, as these people have, and set these people free!
Tell the government - "NO!", and set these people free! Stand with the
proudest traditions of American justice, and set these people free!