emma_goldman
6th September 2006, 23:31
There was a surprise meeting yesterday. A lot of new information came out.
The police report was compiled at night, when it seemed possible there'd been a break-in. The shop owner says after they examined the store in daylight, they determined that there had been no break-in. The D.A.'s office apparently didn't want to hear that, and the shop owner became frustrated over the inability to communicate.
So the two young men were prosecuted for being in a building that they had never entered.
Here's what i've recently added to the Colorado Freedom web page:
It is now apparent that something is rotten in Steamboat.
And it isn't spoiled fruit in a dumpster.
There was a surprise meeting in Steamboat Springs on Tuesday. Some new information came out. According to the Steamboat Pilot, the Steamboat Springs District Attorney insists that there was breaking and entering of the Sweet Pea Produce building.
The initial police report was made after dark. But the store owners inspected the building during daylight and determined that the men had not entered the store.
So-o-o-o— raiding a trash can isn't really what they were prosecuted for.
But what they were charged with, they apparently didn't do.
The accused were told by their attorney that they couldn't get justice at a trial (either.) So they accepted a devil's bargain — six months in jail to avoid felony convictions, which would be based upon erroneous initial police reports. (And i'm certain that accusing someone of a much more significant crime is a wonderful way to intimidate folks into a plea bargain...)
It now seems that the initial reports of burglary can be attributed to a frantic co-owner who simply over-reacted. Yet the D.A.'s office and a captain of police still decline to admit that the initial report was in error. Hey, it’s on the books, that makes it gospel, don't confuse us with the facts.
The Assistant District Attorney who prosecuted the case has said, if he thought the men simply took food from a trash can, he would have handled the case differently. It now appears, the men took food from a trash can. (They've admitted they trespassed to do this.)
Yet even with strong indications that the initial police report was in error, the D.A.'s office stubbornly defends putting two men behind bars for burglary, a crime they never committed. Although a store owner called with the intention of setting the record straight, he apparently never quite got his point across to an Assistant D.A. intent upon "sending a message" to the community, and possibly, "making examples."
Where is justice, when the Assistant D.A. and a main witness passionately disagree over what is now the most fundamental question in the case: whether the two men ever entered the building?
If the two men didn't do what they were prosecuted for, how can the verdict stand?
And most important— how soon can these young men be allowed to go free?
The case now comes down to a question of credibility, with questionable circumstances all around:
The D.A.'s office was providing no comment over the first few days of this media storm. Now the D.A.'s office blames the local newspaper for not knowing what the D.A.'s office declined to tell them.
The D.A.'s office also blames the shop owners for changing their story.
The shop owners mis-understood the process, and the Assistant District Attorney apparently already had what he wanted, so he wasn't too keen on helping them set the record straight.
When they advised their clients to plead guilty, the defense either knew the deck was stacked and their cliients couldn't get a fair trial, or failed to appreciate that prosecution' s case was on the verge of disintegrating.
Here is my favorite out-of-context excerpt, verbatim from the meeting's transcript:
[Shop owner Jonathon] Hieb: So among all this other stuff that you’re doing, and the mistakes that you’ve already made, now you’re calling me a liar? Is that what you’re doing?
[Assistant District Attorney Kerry] St. James: I’m saying we disagree as to that conversation.
Hieb: You know, right now, I think, this is just my two cents. It’s probably worth nothing. But right now, what you need to do, as a man, is take responsibility for your actions.
St. James: I’m sorry. I can’t do that.
Whew! It is, all in all, a rather ugly affair.
This would be a great time to got to Colorado Freedom, and send emails to Steamboat Springs officials. Get these guys out of jail:
http://www.rebelgra phics.org/ coloradofreedom. html
Edit: Should be dumpster of course. Sorry. ;)
The police report was compiled at night, when it seemed possible there'd been a break-in. The shop owner says after they examined the store in daylight, they determined that there had been no break-in. The D.A.'s office apparently didn't want to hear that, and the shop owner became frustrated over the inability to communicate.
So the two young men were prosecuted for being in a building that they had never entered.
Here's what i've recently added to the Colorado Freedom web page:
It is now apparent that something is rotten in Steamboat.
And it isn't spoiled fruit in a dumpster.
There was a surprise meeting in Steamboat Springs on Tuesday. Some new information came out. According to the Steamboat Pilot, the Steamboat Springs District Attorney insists that there was breaking and entering of the Sweet Pea Produce building.
The initial police report was made after dark. But the store owners inspected the building during daylight and determined that the men had not entered the store.
So-o-o-o— raiding a trash can isn't really what they were prosecuted for.
But what they were charged with, they apparently didn't do.
The accused were told by their attorney that they couldn't get justice at a trial (either.) So they accepted a devil's bargain — six months in jail to avoid felony convictions, which would be based upon erroneous initial police reports. (And i'm certain that accusing someone of a much more significant crime is a wonderful way to intimidate folks into a plea bargain...)
It now seems that the initial reports of burglary can be attributed to a frantic co-owner who simply over-reacted. Yet the D.A.'s office and a captain of police still decline to admit that the initial report was in error. Hey, it’s on the books, that makes it gospel, don't confuse us with the facts.
The Assistant District Attorney who prosecuted the case has said, if he thought the men simply took food from a trash can, he would have handled the case differently. It now appears, the men took food from a trash can. (They've admitted they trespassed to do this.)
Yet even with strong indications that the initial police report was in error, the D.A.'s office stubbornly defends putting two men behind bars for burglary, a crime they never committed. Although a store owner called with the intention of setting the record straight, he apparently never quite got his point across to an Assistant D.A. intent upon "sending a message" to the community, and possibly, "making examples."
Where is justice, when the Assistant D.A. and a main witness passionately disagree over what is now the most fundamental question in the case: whether the two men ever entered the building?
If the two men didn't do what they were prosecuted for, how can the verdict stand?
And most important— how soon can these young men be allowed to go free?
The case now comes down to a question of credibility, with questionable circumstances all around:
The D.A.'s office was providing no comment over the first few days of this media storm. Now the D.A.'s office blames the local newspaper for not knowing what the D.A.'s office declined to tell them.
The D.A.'s office also blames the shop owners for changing their story.
The shop owners mis-understood the process, and the Assistant District Attorney apparently already had what he wanted, so he wasn't too keen on helping them set the record straight.
When they advised their clients to plead guilty, the defense either knew the deck was stacked and their cliients couldn't get a fair trial, or failed to appreciate that prosecution' s case was on the verge of disintegrating.
Here is my favorite out-of-context excerpt, verbatim from the meeting's transcript:
[Shop owner Jonathon] Hieb: So among all this other stuff that you’re doing, and the mistakes that you’ve already made, now you’re calling me a liar? Is that what you’re doing?
[Assistant District Attorney Kerry] St. James: I’m saying we disagree as to that conversation.
Hieb: You know, right now, I think, this is just my two cents. It’s probably worth nothing. But right now, what you need to do, as a man, is take responsibility for your actions.
St. James: I’m sorry. I can’t do that.
Whew! It is, all in all, a rather ugly affair.
This would be a great time to got to Colorado Freedom, and send emails to Steamboat Springs officials. Get these guys out of jail:
http://www.rebelgra phics.org/ coloradofreedom. html
Edit: Should be dumpster of course. Sorry. ;)