[转贴]I think your policies in Iraq are reprehensible.

pal2002

From a Australian Blog<br>
<br>
I stumbled across the following news item reported secondhand from the Rocky Mountain News in Colorado.<br>
<br>
Steve Howards, 54, and his wife were walking their son to piano practice in Beaver Creek, Colo., and were surprised to see Vice President Dick Cheney on the street chatting with citizens. “Many of us fantasize what would we do if we had the opportunity to really tell Mr. Bush or Mr. Cheney how we feel,” Howards said, so as he passed by he told Cheney, “I think your policies in Iraq are reprehensible.” After dropping off his son, a Secret Service agent approached Howards and asked, “Did you assault the vice president?” Howards said no, and made it clear he didn’t even attempt to touch Cheney. “If this had happened, I would think if they were doing their job, I would have been face-down in the concrete five or 10 minutes earlier,” he said later. Still, he was handcuffed and jailed, with the Secret Service demanding he be charged with harassment. The Eagle County District Attorney dropped the charge. Howards has filed a lawsuit in federal court accusing Secret Service agent Virgil D. Reichle Jr. with civil rights violations.<br>
<br>
Not wanting to pass on information of dubious origins, I did a little digging to see if I could authenticate the story. I could not find references to the original arrest on the Rocky Mountain News website, but I did find a transcript of the decisions of the court. (Thank you, Google search engines!) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO <br>
<br>
Civil Action No. 06-cv-01964-WYD-CBSSTEVEN HOWARDS, Plaintiff, v. VIRGIL D. “GUS” REICHLE, JR., in his individual and official capacity<br>
<br>
On June 16, 2006, Vice President Dick Cheney was in Beaver Creek, Colorado, as was Plaintiff, Steven Howards. Mr. Howards was walking in Beaver Creek with his young son who was going to a piano lesson, when he saw Mr. Cheney surrounded by people, shaking hands and posing for photographs in an outdoor mall area.<br>
<br>
Mr. Howards and his son walked to where Mr. Cheney was standing and Mr. Howards, who was approximately 2-3 feet away from Mr. Cheney addressed the Vice President by saying “I think your policies in Iraq are reprehensible” or words to that effect. Mr. Howards and his young son then walked away to go to the piano lesson where he joined his wife and his other young son.<br>
<br>
This encounter with the Vice President occurred in plain view of dozens of citizens and numerous Secret Service agents. Approximately five to ten minutes later Mr. Howards and his other son began to return through the same area.<br>
<br>
As Mr. Howards and his son approached the area where the initial encounter occurred, they were intercepted by the Defendant who asked Mr. Howards if he had assaulted the Vice President. Mr. Howards, in shocked amazement, denied that he had assaulted the Vice President. At that point, Mr. Howards, in the presence of his young son, was placed in handcuffs and taken to the Eagle County jail where he was searched and detained for several hours.<br>
<br>
Although the Defendant told Mr. Howards that he was going to be charged with assaulting the vice-president, the Defendant instructed the Eagle County, Colorado Sheriff’s Department to issue Mr. Howards a summons for harassment under Colorado State Law, for harassing the Vice President.<br>
<br>
On July 6, 2006, the Eagle County District Attorney’s office moved to dismiss all charges. On July 10, 2006, the state court dismissed all charges. At no time during these encounters did Steven Howards ever violate any law, federal, state or local. Mr. Howards was arrested without probable cause to believe that he had committed any offense whatsoever.<br>
<br>
Mr. Howards was arrested in retaliation for his having exercised his First Amendment protected free speech right to speak out to the Vice President and in retaliation for his having exercised his First Amendment right to petition his government. <br>
<br>
But does this mean that free speech is still alive and well in the USA? Indeed, is free speech still live anywhere? The case of the Gunns 20 is an example of the problems of free speech in Australia.<br>
<br>
From the Gunns20 website (<a target=_blank href=http://www.gunns20.org/>http://www.gunns20.org/</a>)<br>
<br>
On December 14, 2004, 20 environmental activists, organisations and concerned citizens were issued a 216 page writ by the Tasmanian logging company Gunns Ltd. The woodchipping giant is suing for a combined AU$6.9 million for actions it claims has damaged their business and reputation.<br>
<br>
In August 2006 Gunns third statement of claim was thrown out by the Supreme court in Victoria. The court left it open for Gunns Ltd to re-write their claim in a way acceptable to the court and gave them until 19 October to respond. After a request from Gunns lawyers the court date for response has been extended to 2 November 2006.<br>
<br>
Justice Bernard Bongiorno has rejected Gunns’ third statement of claim in its entirety. The company has been given until 19 October to tell the court if it will try to introduce another statement of claim.<br>
<br>
In the Victorian Supreme Court, Justice Bongiorno said that the statement of claim ‘cannot be allowed to stand in its present form’. Its size and complexity places an unreasonable burden and enormous cost on individual defendants.<br>
<br>
Defendants cautiously welcomed the decision, but pointed out the unfairness of the process. Nearly two years on, after huge expense and anxiety, the case is no further advanced and Gunns still has the option to make a fourth statement of claim.<br>
<br>
If Gunns, with their near-inexhaustable coffers, are able to tie down individual environmentalists to costly court cases and ceaseless challenges to court decisions, then money will win in the end.<br>
<br>