AUGUSTA, Maine — A Superior Court jury on Thursday delivered what a defense lawyer viewed as a victory for the Occupy movement as it deadlocked in a criminal trespass case stemming from a protest on the governor’s mansion property last fall.
The jury was released by Justice Nancy Mills after failing to agree on verdicts in the case against five members of Occupy Augusta. The jurors deadlocked on verdicts for each of the five defendants, said Lynne Williams, attorney for the five.
It was the second day of deliberations.
“I think it’s definitely a victory. We made an argument that the Blaine House, as part of the Capitol complex … is a public forum for First Amendment activities,” Williams said after jurors were sent home.
It was undecided whether there will be a retrial for the five: Elizabeth Burke, 48, of Union; Kimberly Cormier, 47, of Benton; Patricia Messier, 63, of Wiscasset; Jenny Gray, 54, of Wiscasset; and David Page, 44, of Surry.
Kennebec County’s acting district attorney, Alan Kelley, said no decision had been reached on whether to ask for a retrial. But he said that when deciding whether to request a new trial, his office will take into consideration a note that was passed from the jury to the judge saying some of the jurors were biased against the government and were unable to reach a verdict.
The case follows a string of court defeats for the Occupy movement in Augusta, Portland and other cities outside of the state, where judges have ruled that the protesters’ encampments could be broken up without violating the participants’ free-speech rights. Occupy members have protested what they view as economic disparities in America.
The five defendants were part of a group of nine who were charged with defying police orders to leave the Blaine House grounds on Nov. 27 in a protest launched from their Capitol Park encampment. Gov. Paul LePage was not home at the time.
The group was protesting police demands that they get a permit to continue their encampment.
Two cases remain to be tried. Of the other two decided already, one defendant pleaded no contest and was fined $250. The other, Diane Messer, of Liberty, was found guilty and fined $400 plus fees.
Messer, who was in court observing the latest case Thursday, said the Occupy members chose jury trials because “we firmly believed we had a right to defend our constitutional rights and to have a jury of our peers judge whether we were justified, and the only way to do that is to have a trial by jury.”
While deliberating, jurors at one point asked for a copy of the U.S. Constitution and later for the Bill of Rights. The judge ordered the jurors into the courtroom and told them they had been presented all of the evidence and instructed in the law, so they should be able to make a decision.
“You have to understand, the record is closed at this point,” the judge said.
Jury=clowns.
And I’m sure you attended the entire trial, right?
Jury=the american way. It is our system of justice, love it or leave it for Russia.
.
it only takes one
I would have a hard time with jury duty . I think it would be hung more than not if I was on one.
Great. So, now the protesters cost Maine even more money, if another trial is held.
If another trial is held, it won’t be the protesters who are responsible for the cost. It will be the state for persuing a frivilous case. Relax, that is not going to happen. After all, it is our lawn, not the states.’ We pay for it, not them.
So citizens who were charged with a crime availed themselves to one of the rights provided by “The Bill of Rights” and just because the State could not prove it’s case beyond a reasonable doubt to the jury it is the defendants fault. Wow I know you are a right winger, but blaming the accused for the State failing in it’s burden of proof doesn’t pass the straight face test.
—–
It is a sad day for the State of Maine when twelve people can’t agree that a crime has been comitted in a simple case like this. It is quite clear that at least one individual on the jury did not listen to the instructions from Justice Mills. Either that, or they just didn’t care.
Or it could have been all but one that wanted to find them innocent. Of course that presumed innocent thingy can get in the way. Darned Bill of Rights.
Then there were eleven people who either weren’t paying attention or who just didn’t care! Either way, it speaks volumes of the moral decay of not only this State but of this Country when we the people can no longer count on our jurors to follow the letter of the law.
—–
Were you present for the presentation of evidence?
I’m looking at the picture right now. A residence should be respected as private property whether or not it is publicly owned. They would have no case at all if this were the White House outside of business hours.
So you are looking at a picture. What does that have to do with the evidence presented at trial?
I wasn’t at the trial, so I can’t express an informed decision on the evidence presented. And unless you were there for the whole trial, neither can you.
I can say that when public property and the exercise of free speech is involved, seldom is the case “simple.”
“I wasn’t at the trial, so I can’t express an informed decision on the evidence presented. And unless you were there for the whole trial, neither can you.” Wrong! If you have been to one criminal trespass trial, you have been to them all.
“I can say that when public property and the exercise of free speech is involved, seldom is the case “simple.” Sorry, wrong again.
This was a simple case of criminal trespass. To be charged with criminal trespass you merely have to be or remain on property where you are not permitted to be and have been warned to leave. That is what happened in this case. You can’t just walk up and hang around outside on the lawn of the Blaine House anymore than you can the White House. These individuals were ordered to leave and they refused which meant they were trespassing. This case had nothing to do with free speech and when twelve jurors cannot come together as a group and figure that out we are in big trouble.
“If you have been to one criminal trespass trial, you have been to them all.”
That’s odd. Explain, then, why we even have trials for criminal trespass charges. After all, the defendant is guilty in each one, according to you, right?
You do know what a “trial” is, don’t you?
There most certainly was some form of speech going on. The question was whether the speech turned into mere conduct, and whether the defendants had criminal intent and whether the authorities had properly ordered the protesters to leave, and whether the authorities even had the authority to order the protesters to leave. There is even the question of whether the protesters were ordered to leave on the basis of their speech and not on any conduct.
The prosecutor had to address these issues and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that each individual had committed criminal trespass.
It’s not that simple. If it were, we wouldn’t have trials.
Ryan what you are not understanding is that if MountainMan says it is so then it has to be so. He knows and that is all that is important. Forget about due process of law and the rest of those silly things called “rights”. All we have to do is have self appointed experts like MountainMan decide who is innocent or guilty based on what he has heard or read in a newspaper.
What struck me was how — equal we all seemed– Everyone has their own point of view– but I had the feeling that everyone in courtroom — judge, bailiff, and other officials, the court reporter, and all three lawyers, the defendants and the jury — were doing their level best to see justice through. For myself in regards to costs. My view– my motivation for being involved was that — is that the corruption and fallout thereof in crucial parts of our society demands that I — protest. The traditional means of seeking redress of monumental errors — are clogged and all but non responsive our voices to be heard must take our bodies to the streets and halls of government.
The bill of rights, prevails,as it should!
Let freedom ring! We left King George behind a long time ago…
Attention Bangor Daily and Associated Press. The lawn belongs to the Citizens of Maine not Paul Richard LePage. He is just a freeloader in OUR public housing.
Please explain this to me. A church from Florida can go to Funeral Homes all over the country and protest at funerals of military people fighting for the Constitution and our FREEDOM, yet we Americans are not allowed to protest what we consider unfair practice by Banks, Corporations and Government. Lepage is an ELECTED official. His home is paid for by TAX dollars, which the PUBLIC pays. So why in god’s name are we not allowed to view our discontent at his place of residence just as that church practices its freedom of speach at our loved ones funerals? Isnt the courts system just an outreach of the political process anyway? Why should they even be allowed to decide what we do in protest to the government buildings. Isnt that a conflict of interest? Greece, Egypt, Syria all protest against the government and are continuing to do so. Why, in the land of the free are we not allowing the same here? What kind of message does that send to the rest of the world? Yep, American, land of the Free, unless of course you disagree with the Government, then they take ya to court to get you to shut your mouths.