Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

JOHNSON: DNC protest trials no plus for city

By Bill Johnson, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published December 2, 2008 at 9:28 p.m.

Text size  

More News Columns & Blogs

More stories »

The prosecutors won't talk to me, which is fair enough. They know I think they are on a fool's errand, mostly because I have told them so.

Their prosecution of the more than 100 people taken into custody following the mass arrests on the first day of the Democratic National Convention last August is, quite simply, a joke.

It is a mockery of justice. I have sat through enough of the multiple, droning, zero-evidence trials to know this. The mayor, you ask me, should put his foot down immediately, and stop this waste of civic money, city courts and citizens' time.

"They were there, we arrested them so you must convict them," is not how the American system of justice - even at the municipal level - was ever engineered to work.

How city attorneys have won five convictions in the more than 30 cases so far brought to trial is, to me, beyond imagination. A lawyer, who has tried more than a few of the cases and sat in on all of them, insists jurors simply didn't like the way the five looked.

By this logic, though, there is no way Tiffany Bray should have ever sat through a pair of three-day trials.

At 20, she is angelic of face and maybe 5 feet tall in heels - not exactly the prototypical rabble-rousing anarchist that prosecutors have painted her at trial on a charge of blocking a public street.

She and two young men stood trial in October, the first of the nearly 60 trials scheduled in Denver County Court between then and next month.

The jury acquitted one of the men, and, as it did with Tiffany Bray, deadlocked on the other. The judge threw out the case against the second man, but allowed prosecutors to refile against her.

It has been two weeks since Tiffany Bray stood trial again, this time with two Muslim women. With the country being the way it has become, Tiffany Bray figured she was done for.

"One even testified in her own behalf," Tiffany Bray recalled. "I thought, 'Oh, my God, if I don't, I'll for sure look guilty.' I still decided to take a different tack."

She testified long the first time. This time, she sat silently, allowing videotape taken by a legal observer to testify for her.

At trial the first time, prosecutors ran videotape of her wearing a facemask and shaking her fist, demanding to be released. Only anarchists wear masks and shake their fists, prosecutors told the jury.

Her lawyer, Joshua Norkin, this time used the same prosecution videotape, but started it earlier and showed Tiffany Bray without a mask and shaking her fist only after police had shut down the corner of 15th Street and Cleveland Place, allowing no one to leave.

"We were able to show that she was given the mask by people concerned about her, that she demanded to be let go only after the police had left her no escape," Joshua Norkin said in an interview.

Something else was afoot.

"The jury, you could tell they were mad that they were there at all, that the trial was a waste of their time," Tiffany Bray said.

She remembers smiling when she saw one juror reading recipes during testimony.

The three women were acquitted after two hours of deliberation.

"The major factor between this time and the last time was the jury," Tiffany Bray said. "You could tell they were angry."

Like so many of the 60 who have demanded court trials, Tiffany Bray's curiosity about the big crowd that had formed that August afternoon had gotten the best of her. And soon, like the rest of the bystanders, she found she had nowhere to go.

"They keep bringing these cases without a single shred of evidence that anyone standing trial did anything wrong," said Joshua Norkin, 27, who passed the bar only in October and was immediately assigned three DNC cases. He has won two and, on Tuesday, was preparing a closing argument on the third.

He was mulling whether to even present a defense since, he said, the evidence of criminality proffered by the prosecution was virtually non-existent.

How had the experience changed her? I asked Tiffany Bray, a full-time nanny.

"A few things I have taken from it," she said. "I approach everything now with caution. I am more aware of my surroundings and force myself not to get so excited and act on it.

"I learned through testimony that this whole mass-arrest was 100 percent orchestrated by undercover officers dressed in the 'anarchist uniform,' a way to give police practice early and to send a message. It was all a total set-up.

"After six days of sitting at trial, I have learned this country isn't everything I thought it was."

Would she now ever participate in a protest?

This is the part of the DNC mass-arrest story that needs to be hammered home, written about again and again.

"Maybe if it was something I felt strongly about. I don't know," Tiffany Bray said after a long pause. "It definitely has been a life-changing experience."

"If not for the jury, I believe someone in the system would have found me guilty. Juries," she said, "are keeping my faith in it."

Comments

  • December 3, 2008

    6:22 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    LaFajita writes:

    I would like to thank Tiffany for standing up for herself against a venal and corrupt "justice" system. There are some prosecutors who need to stand trial for misconduct.

    There are also some police undercover thugs who need to stand trial for reckless endangerment and assault. Apparently the demonstrators weren't being "protesty" enough, so these guys created a riot where wasn't one, and then lied on their police reports. They've been lying ever since.

    I suppose I could find some fault with the juries that have convicted four (or is it five?) defendents, but when a jury is lied to the way these juries were lied to, it really isn't completely their fault that they come up with a bad verdict. Fortunately, the sentences imposed have amounted to smallish fines and suspended sentences (unjust prosecution and police terror notwithstanding).

  • December 3, 2008

    7:28 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    sheepherder writes:

    The jury must be seeing different video than I did. That mob group was acting like a group of animals! LaFajita...I don't even know how to respond to your post...silly.

  • December 3, 2008

    9:05 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    freethinker07 writes:

    Why don't you talk to one of the jurors who voted to convict? As a journalist, it would seem that you would try to talk to them if you wanted to be fair.

    You said: "At 20, she (Bray) is angelic of face and maybe 5 feet tall in heels - not exactly the prototypical rabble-rousing anarchist that prosecutors have painted her at trial on a charge of blocking a public street."

    Are you seriously advancing the sexist notion that she should not have been convicted because of her gender and beauty? (Note to editor: Where were you on this?) Whether she was a prototypical rabble rousing anarchist has nothing to do with whether she was guilty this time. (As an aside, many of the female "rabble rousing anarchists" at CU some years ago were cute. Many were also short. Perhaps Mr. Johnson doesn't get out enough.)

    Why did she put on the mask? Did she think that it would make the police less likely to worry about her? If she had been in a bank with a mask on, would the teller be justified in worrying that she might be up to no good? If a masked man came to the door where she was taking care of children, would she worry about him?

    The attorney's assertion that five were convicted on looks would equally explain the acquittals, that people liked their looks.

    The larger picture about the demonstration is actually that the people of downtown Denver need to feel secure in the their homes and businesses. Mobs of masked people screaming at police is not conducive to an environment that people want to live and work in.

    The larger picture about this article is that Johnson presented no information which disagreed with his position (a sure marker of bias) and that one of the pieces of evidence he presented was blatantly sexist.

  • December 3, 2008

    11:07 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    mobyminnow writes:

    Geez...whatever happened to peaceful, noisy protest? Do you really think the businesses, etc., were in danger? Or did the police go overboard to establish a deterrent against real agitators? And I didn't know that wearing a mask was a crime...We'd best cancel Halloween so the cops don't have to overtax themselves and the trick or treaters, uh, anarchists, don't get arrested and prosecuted.
    I agree with Bill. The trials are a waste of time and an embarrassment to the City of Denver. The DNC experience was successful and a real source of pride for us. Let's not throw cold water on it now by wasting money and time on a bunch of noisy people. I would hope that the prosecutors would spend their time on real crimes.

  • December 3, 2008

    12:13 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    LetsThink writes:

    A weeping heart liberal always sides with anarchists.

    What we really need is a few more Conservative editors!!!

  • December 3, 2008

    2:35 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    peterpi writes:

    Freethinker wonders why Johnson doesn't talk to a juror?
    Because maybe Johnson doesn't want his conclusions to be shaken? Because that would be logical to do? Because Johnson heard that one juror read recipes during the trial, and therefore assumes all DNC trial jurors are Mayberry goombahs?
    Because he doesn't want to hear that, at least for one of the convicted, jurors saw evidence proving -- beyond a reasonable doubt -- that she obstructed a street?
    Believe me, I love a good protest as much as the next Leftie. In most of these cases, the prosecution has no case. The prosecution is also trying to prove guilt by mere association. The prosecution is outraged that people were chanting "Whose Streets? Our Streets." and therefore they must be guilty of something. But, at the same time, ...
    As the saying goes "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time." If you're going to obstruct a street be prepared to accept the consequences. And maybe, just maybe, Bill Johnson, there were jurors who took their assigned task seriously, who deliberated with, well, deliberation, who reviewed all the evidence. And while finding most not guilty, due to lack of or no evidence, came to the justified conclusion that five were guilty as charged.

  • December 3, 2008

    3:52 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    LaFajita writes:

    First, just to clear something up, it is not a crime to be an anarchist.

    Second, the video in Tiffany's second trial was the same one presented by the prosecution in her first trial. The only difference was in the start time of the video, which shows information which is clearly exculpatory to Ms. Bray. As a trained legal observor I am basing my claim of prosecutorial misconduct on this information.

    Did I mention it's not a crime to be an anarchist? Some folks need a lot of reminding.

    The video also shows a lack of fair warning by the police, and the beginnings of the police riot in the face of the non-protesty protestors. This info was not available in Tiffany's first trial, or in the trial of Eric Nunez, convicted of SWH (Standing While Hispanic).

    Bill would have a hard time finding jurors who voted to convict because there just aren't very many of them. What I want to know about is whether there were weaknesses in the defense, which may have had more to do with these losses.

    And one more time, it is not a crime to be an anarchist.

  • December 4, 2008

    10:04 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Marshdale writes:

    Waste of time for the courts. Protesters are not anarchists. Read some history. Second, throughout history one mans anarchist has been another mans hero. I give you Sparticus, Jesus Christ, Paul Revere, Harriot Tubbman, late 19th century labor movement. They all accomplished a greater good for the world and country at their given times and place in history. Don't be so quick to judge, unless you have been there and felt so much passion yourself to try and change things.

  • December 4, 2008

    10:29 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Gonzopozo writes:

    The "trials" must go on !

    Something has to justify the millions of dollars spent on security against a threat that turned out to be Denver PD's version of "weapons of mass destruction".