Time not on side of Invesco Field security forces

By Sara Burnett, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Originally published 04:03 p.m., July 14, 2008
Updated 10:58 a.m., July 15, 2008

Barry Gutierrez / The Rocky

A tent to house 15,000 media personal covering the convention is set up in the parking lot west of the Pepsi Center.

The decision to hold the last night of the Democratic National Convention at Invesco Field has left Denver "between the proverbial rock and a hard place" as it tries to make security plans and accommodate protesters, a lawyer for the city said Monday.

"Time is not our friend," attorney Jim Lyons told U.S. District Judge Marcia Krieger during a federal court hearing.

The city and Secret Service have been working for more than 17 months on plans for the Pepsi Center, where all four days of the DNC originally were planned.

Last Monday, Democrats announced that the final night of the convention - when Barack Obama is scheduled to accept the party's nomination for president - will take place at Invesco Field at Mile High.

The much larger venue - Invesco holds almost four times the number of people as the Pepsi Center - requires different security plans, Lyons said.

But the city can't begin formulating those plans, or decide where to locate a designated protest zone at Invesco, until the Secret Service has conducted a risk assessment for the stadium.

That assessment isn't complete, and the Secret Service doesn't know when it will be, Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Rocque said.

The protest zone

The city hasn't finalized plans for protesters at Invesco Field, though it has said there will be a designated protest zone there. The plans for Pepsi Center released by the city and Secret Service so far are:

* A public viewing area or protest zone of about 53,000 square feet will be in Lot A, normally used for VIP parking.

* It will be surrounded by two wire mesh or chain link fences. Protesters must stay inside the inner fence. The outer fence will be eight feet away and provide a buffer.

* If delegates walk directly from the security checkpoint to the Pepsi Center, they will pass within 200 to 400 feet of the protest zone.

* That view will be lit at night.

* People inside the protest zone will not be able to hand out leaflets or other information to people outside the zone.

* Parades will be allowed between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. during the convention. The designated route starts near Civic Center and travels west on Colfax, then north on Speer, finishing at Speer and Larimer. Marchers may then walk across the Auraria campus to the protest zone.

• July 14, 2008

  4:17 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  FallyBerry writes:

  So the protestors are wild animals caged and protected by a barrier that the delegates can choose to gawk at or pass?
  Does this seem overly bizarre to anyone else?

• July 14, 2008

  4:59 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Diff writes:

  "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances"
  So if it is the FBI or the DPD or the Secret service it's OK?

  Guess we can now only peaceably assemble with in the confines as what ever law enforce says we can - Zounds lik das Gastapo to me. Ja?

  Thanks George!

  01-09-2008 is coming soon. not fast enough!

• July 14, 2008

  5:15 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  HSTOWEL writes:

  Diff writes:

  "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances"

  The Constitution allows protests but there is no guarantee that the protesters can be withing touching distance of politicians and there is no guarantee that they can stand anyplace of their choosing or block functions as many have suggested they intend to do. What would you have the government do with 50,000 idiots? Have you not seen what these "protesters" did in Seattle and other places? Being a protester doesn't give you the right to disrupt functions, assault the police, and damage property. You have the right to assemble and state your message and that's it. Too bad some people don't understand that.

• July 14, 2008

  5:36 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Scott writes:

  Uh Diff, the restrictions are being enacted by Lickenpooper's cops and the SS. If the dems are truly bent out of shape about the demonstration pen, then why haven't they made a stink about it to DEMOCRAT Lickenpooper and to the SS? All they'd have to do is tell both Lickenpooper and the SS, "Thanks, but no thanks. We value freedom of expression." Nope, I STILL haven't heard the dems say anything ... Hmmmmmmm.

  Oops, I forgot. It's easier for a lib to blame Bush.

  Scott

• July 14, 2008

  5:38 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Scott writes:

  I forgot to add that ANY demonstration that might get in the way of the dems might mar the coronation of BHO. The dems can't have that can they!?

  Scott

• July 14, 2008

  5:44 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Houstongolfnut writes:

  I still can't figure out what they are protesting. Are the Democrats not leftist enough? Not socialist enough? Could it be that some people just want to bring attention to themselves and this is their avenue to that? WOW! Talk about self absorbed!

• July 14, 2008

  5:59 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  farsidefan writes:

  Houston,
  From stuff I've read, the ones truly intent on stirring the pot are the anarchist types. They seem to be interested in more than just civil disobedience.
  Of course, most folks on this site tend to lump them in with the Dems. Quite convenient, I think.
  I actually would like to see both conventions halted in their tracks right now.
  We know the candidates, we know the platforms, let the games begin !
  Thumbs up or down and move on.
  Save a lot of money.
  Sasquatch could use it for a bigger and better" Global Warming Window ".
  Sorry, Sas couldn't resist.

• July 14, 2008

  6:14 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  The_Punnisher writes:

  The next announcement will be the addition of RAZOR WIRE....

  Like a certain set of edifices in Lakewood or Limon....

  It looks like our SS is looking more like GERMANY'S SS every day..

  I can't wait for the the display of force...Oops, we had that already.....

  The stage is set....now all we need are the PLAYERS....

• July 14, 2008

  6:26 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  drkenne writes:

  And another reason to recreate 1968. I guess it's OK to voice dissent as long as it's at the times and places of the government’s choosing. Will we be able to explain to future generations what it was like when there was free speech and the right to free protest was part of democracy before Bush and his criminal cronies hijacked the constitution?

• July 14, 2008

  6:28 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  rray writes:

  The "cage" is not going to be the issue... these folks still have to march to the area and go into the enclosure. A whole lot can happen before that ever takes place. My guess is that this fenced area will be more useful as a holding pen till the wagons arrive to haul them off.

  Regardless of being a Dem or Rep... this event is going to be a huge black-eye on Denver and Colorado. Bad planning and bad management. Notice how the issue of the MileHigh speech is hardly even being discussed? Where will the protesters be "caged" there?

• July 14, 2008

  7:02 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  ColoradoDave writes:

  Diff writes,

  "Guess we can now only peaceably assemble with in the confines as what ever law enforce says we can - Zounds lik das Gastapo to me. Ja?
  Thanks George!
  01-09-2008 is coming soon. not fast enough!"

  Diff, while I think George Bush is giving James Buchanan some stiff competition for worst president ever, you cannot lay the blame for these situations on Bush. The reason protesters need to be separated from the delegates is because of the violent potential of the protesters. The riots in Seattle during the WTO conference set the stage for these more restrictive accomodations.

  Secondly, while the content of speech cannot be restricted, the manner, time and place can be restricted. You can rent a soundtruck and drive down Colfax at noon espousing your beliefs but you cannot use that soundtruck at 6 am in a residential neighborhood. Not all of the protesters want violence but a large percentage (perhaps as high as 20%) do want violence. The city has the authority to take measures to keep the peace and the Secret Service has the obligation to protect the candidate.

  Finally, I have to call Godwin's law on you for your Gestapo analogy.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

• July 14, 2008

  7:08 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  ColoradoDave writes:

  Scott writes:

  "Uh Diff, the restrictions are being enacted by Lickenpooper's cops and the SS. If the dems are truly bent out of shape about the demonstration pen, then why haven't they made a stink about it to DEMOCRAT Lickenpooper and to the SS?"

  Scott the protesters are not Democrats. They are primarily anarchists with some Libertarians, Greens and other malcontents thrown in for good measure. Stop by "Recreate 68's" website and see for yourself.

  Also many of the same groups have plans to do the same thing in Minneapolis at the RNC. Google "RNC, protests" and see for yourself.

• July 14, 2008

  7:24 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  7_ogNiOj writes:

  Indeed, these are mostly people who believe that a choice between two of the same thing is no choice at all, is not democracy.

• July 14, 2008

  7:28 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  ColoradoDave writes:

  Houstongolfnut writes:

  "I still can't figure out what they are protesting. Are the Democrats not leftist enough? Not socialist enough?"

  The Democrats are not Socialist at all. When you compare the platforms of the US parties with the platforms from the parties in the other industrial democracies you will find the US Democratic Party is a Center-Right party.

  Compare Obama to Sarkozy. American conservatives call Obama a socialist at the same time that they praise France's lurch to the right.

  Let's compare their stances: They both believe the Iraq war was a terrible mistake and that the US should withdraw as soon as is possible. Sarkozy's big difference with Chirac was that while he agreed with Chirac on how the invasion would be a mistake he thought Chirac was rude in the way he presented that belief.

  Domestic issues: Sarkozy believes in universal-single-payer-government-funded health care. Obama does not. Both Sarkozy and Obama believe in reproductive choice and are in favor of stem cell research.

  Foreign Policy: Sarkozy is a strong advocate of diplomacy being instrumental in creating the Mediterranean Union an effort to get Arab, North African and Southern European countries to work together to solve the regions conflicts.

  Law and Order: This is where Sarkozy gets his conservative reputation. He is a strong advocate of law and order issues and in controling the runaway immigration problem in France.

  So, one of the most conservative politicians in Europe is to the left of most Democrats on virtually every issue save immigration.

  The protesters are protesting not because they feel the Democrats aren't far enough to the left but because they feel America has drifted too far to the right.

  And before any of you Right-Wingers bring out the old "those Europeans have destroyed their economy with their welfare states" canard: have you compared the Euro to the Dollar lately?

• July 14, 2008

  7:49 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  ColoradoDave writes:

  I think the reason behind these protests is a mistaken belief held by those on the left and right.

  Both side believe that it was the protests of 1967 and 1968 which ended the Vietnam War.

  Yes, hundreds of thousands took to the streets those two years to protest the war. Americans didn't withdraw from Vietnam until 5 years later in 1973 with the last Americans leaving in 1975.

  Those on the right blame those "Effing Hippies" for loosing the war and those on the Left take pride in "Ending the War Man!" Your both wrong. The war ended because Kissinger realized it was a no-win situation fought over false pretexts (the erroneous belief that the Soviets and the Chinese liked each other when in fact they hated each other more than they hated us).

  I think as protesters see how little effect they have on events they become increasingly frustrated, angry and violent. That explains Glenn Spagnuolo today and why the protesters became more and more violent as 1967 turned into 1968.

  Yes the riots at the DNC put Nixon into office but it would not have made a difference as Humphrey was likely no different.

  Johnson, Humphrey, Nixon, Agnew. Now those were the days when there really was no difference between the two parties.

• July 14, 2008

  7:52 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Cabermon writes:

  Just hope that both of the fences confining the protesters are electrified!
  SNAP! CRACKLE! POP!

• July 14, 2008

  7:55 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Mike846 writes:

  Repression of expression always, ALWAYS, comes from the Left. They can't compete with the idea of freedom of expression with their dogma, so they simply eliminate other points of view. THEIR speech is "free"; other's speech is "hate". How many examples of this nonsense to you have to see to really SEE it? Take the idiot "judge" in Texas last week who took racial offense when another panel member compared the traffic ticket office to a "black hole". He was so stupid, he didn't know what a "black hole" was, but he took it to be racist. Folks, wake up. Its Hickenlooper and his minions who are restricting free speech, not the Bushies. And like many above in these comments have pointed out, you have a right to PEACEABLY ASSEMBLE, not to disrupt. No better example can be found than when any conservative trys to speak on a college campus. The local Left Wing shows up and shouts him down and refuses to let him speak. Look to your own skirts, Liberals. And, sooner or later, like the Nazi's and the Communists, you will begin to hunt your own. Ask Trotsky. Mike

• July 14, 2008

  8:28 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  ColoradoDave writes:

  Mike846 writes:
  "Repression of expression always, ALWAYS, comes from the Left. They can't compete with the idea of freedom of expression with their dogma, so they simply eliminate other points of view."

  "The pair (Leslie Weise and Alex Young) say they were told by the Denver Secret Service chief who investigated the incident that they were removed from the taxpayer-funded public event at the Wings Over the Rockies Museum because they arrived in a car with a bumper sticker that read, "No more blood for oil."

  So Mike, do you really believe that crap or are you just a tool?

• July 14, 2008

  8:48 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Skyebeader writes:

  ""At this point we don't know what the plans for Invesco Field are," said Rocque, who represents the Secret Service."

  That reassuring confidence settles everything for me... Bring 'er on!!!

• July 14, 2008

  11:14 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Openminded1 writes:

  What is the problem??????? Security is security, they're doing the same thing in Minn.......

• July 14, 2008

  11:57 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Skyebeader writes:

  Well, that certainly makes it better, in my mind. Thanks for that. I would guess that absolutely no security is far, far better than none at all... And when all things in that regard are exactly equal, I sleep well.

• July 15, 2008

  6:03 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  LOUIE writes:

  Problem with all the fencing and arrangments being made for the protesters is are the protesters going to abide by these measures? What if by sheer numbers they overwhelm as they have threatened to do? Does Denver have a contingency force big enough to handle riots in multiple places as threatened. I think Denver is going to be quite ill prepared, especially in light of the fact many of the rank and file police do not care for Mayor Hinkenlooper anyway. When you never apologize for an illegal dishwasher in one of your restaurants, killing a police officer and running to Mexico, it kind of left a bad taste in thier mouths. Many officers think the mayor is more content to lose an officer than a rioter; it's just a whisper I heard this week mayor. Many think the mayor feels the city can better absorb the loss of an police officer better than the loss of a protester. You don't have many friends in blue mayor, but that's just my opinion and mine alone. You stepped on a lot of toes Mayor.

• July 15, 2008

  6:13 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  LOUIE writes:

  To the protesters, be lucky Dill is not chief, and you have a good man like Mr. Whitman to pick on. Dill would love you, love you a long time. Between Dill and J.C. Tyus, many a convict and criminal found Jesus. Oh, that light you see at the end of the tunnel; that's just a streetlight you see when going unconscience.

• July 15, 2008

  8:43 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  temurlan writes:

  Froward, I like how you pick a platitude to address.

  "Repression of expression always, ALWAYS, comes from the Left."

  And then you completely ignore everything else he said. Care to address the rest of his point. Explain how the following shows how the left respects free speech.

  "No better example can be found than when any conservative trys to speak on a college campus. The local Left Wing shows up and shouts him down and refuses to let him speak."

• July 15, 2008

  8:49 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  Scott writes:

  Openminded1 sez: "What is the problem? .. they're doing the same thing in Minn......."

  Not so much a "problem" as hypocrisy. The dems "claim" to be the party of freedom, e.g. freedom of speech, assembly, etc., yet they haven't said a peep about the demonstration cage. Hence the hypocrisy.

  The dems try to portray the republicans as the evil suppressors of freedom, hence if the same type of security measures are being enacted in Minn, then that would be expected ... if you believe the dems views of repubs.

  Scott

• July 15, 2008

  11:34 a.m.

  Suggest removal

  jaymoveonorg writes:

  With wanting to have his big speech in front of 75,000 people Obama has opened up another can of worms. At least at the Pepsi center the Democrats could control who got in. With wanting to fill every seat they will be letting in a lot of people. How do they know if that person is not a protestor who will try to cause problems like rushing the stage?

  Haven't we seen this after a football game and how if there are determined people to rush the field they will be able to even if there are a lot of security to stop them. Should be a mess.

• July 15, 2008

  3:17 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  jay writes:

  it will make for a great venue for an historic speech. looking forward to watching it.

• July 20, 2008

  2:53 p.m.

  Suggest removal

  Ron4Obama writes:

  Time and again I here the question "why are acitvists protesting the Democrats instead of the Republicans" The short answer is that they have plans to demonstrate at both the RNC and the DNC conventions.

  The longer answer is that the Democrats have in many instances been as responsible for many of the challenges we currently face because all to often just as the Republicans have done, they too often take the course that is politically expedient with regard to how well it polls, with regard to whether they are up for re-election in the next race, to curry favor with special interest groups etc.

  Regarding the "accomodations" that are being provided for the exercize of 1st amendment rights, you can call me crazy but does anyone really see a scenario where your "Freedom of Speech" is confined to a Gitmo like cage as being anything that our fore fathers would have invisioned?

  Can you imagine how any of those who fought and died for our cherished freedoms looking down on Americans being herded into cages to exercize their rights might feel about such an absurdly bizzar scene? I can only imagine that it would have them rolling over in their graves.