A Story of Resistance: How a Conservative Rural Community Repudiated the Administration’s Effort to Criminalize Dissent
by Jim Moran
On March 17, 2003, Saint Patrick’s Day, only days before “Shock and Awe,” four Catholic Workers entered the U.S. Military Recruiting Station in Ithaca, NY, and spilled their blood to protest the imminent invasion of Iraq. They knelt, read a statement in opposition to the war, prayed, and waited to be arrested. Ithaca is home to both Cornell University and Ithaca College and has long been a bastion of liberal/progressive sentiment in conservative upstate New York. Indicted on felony criminal mischief, the four represented themselves at trial. They argued that the action was justified, invoking international law. A Tompkins County jury was unable to reach a verdict, and a mistrial was declared. The District Attorney, reportedly convinced that he would never convict with a local jury, referred the case to the Federal authorities.
On February 17, 2005, a federal grand jury in Binghamton, New York indicted the four: Daniel Burns, Teresa Grady, Clare Grady, and Peter DeMott, now referred to as the St. Patrick’s Four, under an obscure federal statute (18 US Code Sec. 372), alleging conspiracy to impede an officer by “force, intimidation, or threat.” The Four now faced a potential sentence of six years and fine of $250,000. The Justice Department must have been confident that they had the proper conservative, rural venue in which to bring this indictment, to secure a sure conviction, and to set a precedent criminalizing opposition to the war with severe sentencing exposure. Events did not unfold as they planned.
The St. Patrick’s Four were never intimidated. They come from the Plowshares tradition and welcomed the opportunity to speak truth to power. In Binghamton, a number of activists began to plan for support of the Four. A defense team of lawyers, paralegals, and defendants worked together to prepare for trial. Just as importantly, a local support committee grew, involving veterans against the war, other activists, secular as well as religious. When the Judge denied the Four the right to present a defense referencing international law, an ambitious Citizens Tribunal was organized, to run every night of the trial. The testimonies of James Petras, Medea Benjamin, veterans, former intelligence officers, a former British Member of Parliament, and more were heard by overflow nightly crowds and reported daily in the local press. Every day of trial, the street in front of the Federal Courthouse was filled with supporters and opponents of the Four. The local media was full of not only coverage of the trial but also reflections on the war for the entire week. By the week’s end, the barriers dividing supporters and opponents of the Four were removed by the people. Both sides were expressing support for the troops, with supporters of the Four emphasizing that support meant bringing the troops home. [more]
September 30th, 2005 at 10:44 am
I’m glad they got off the most serious charge, but… please don’t hold these four people up as paragons of the anti-war movement. Their conduct during the trial was embarrassing, as was their sophomoric splashing of blood to begin with. This is exactly the sort of unimaginative, masturbatory protest that makes people tune out and not listen to the message. It’s not helpful.