It looks like the 30 protesters who were arrested at Wake County school board meetings in 2010 will finally be going to court.
Court dates have been scheduled for four Fridays between March 2 and April 13. Prosecutors grouped the court dates for the defendants based on when they were arrested.
This means the people arrested in March and June 2010 will be in court March 2. This group includes the Rev. William Barber, president of the state NAACP; the Rev. Nancy Petty, pastor of Pullen Memorial Baptist Church; Tim Tyson, a Duke University historian and author; and Dante Strobino, co-founder of the self-described socialist group Raleigh FIST.
Barber and Petty, who were re-arrested in July 2010, will also appear in court March 16. That day, some of the other protesters arrested at the tumultuous July 2010 meeting will also go to court.
The remaining people arrested in July 2010 have a court date on March 30.
The people arrested in August 2010, including Seth Keel, have a court date on April 13.
Comments
Were you there?
Sat, 02/11/2012 - 12:18 — louiselee44I have stayed pretty quiet on this issue up until now.
Some of us attended most, if not all, of the board meetings that were "disrupted" in ways I have never seen in my 20-some years of participation there. At one meeting, I sat beside one of the "imported" protesters that was arrested early on. The atmosphere then, and at subsequent meetings, was one of intimidation and unbelievable disrespect for anyone who dared to speak a viewpoint contrary to that of certain "hecklers" in the audience. For the first time in my life, I actually left a meeting early, without sharing my prepared speech, because the atmosphere was so volatile. Some folks who are "regulars" stopped attending meetings because they were afraid.
Whatever else one might say about Ron Margiotta, he was certainly not "out to get" anyone. The fact - yes, fact - of the matter is that he was patient with protesters (and many audience members), meeting after meeting, giving them much more leeway than some thought they deserved. He put up with hateful verbal outbursts, venom-filled accusations by speakers who were misinformed or uninformed, distractions that took time away from other speakers - oh the list goes on and on.
I'm not taking sides here - if I am an eye-witness, I will take up for anyone who is being so unjustly represented. Ron M. isn't perfect, none of us are, but the monster image some have created of this man has blinded them to truth. I well remember that during the stormy days of name-calling accusations, at least one prominent radio talk-show host was fanning the anti-Margiotta flames by quoting the man as saying "here're the coons". You can imagine the uproar that caused! Well, I happen to have been at the meeting where Margiotta supposedly said that, so I promptly called that host and set him straight (off the air). Ron M. was actually calling the next speaker, Heather Koons (sp?) to the podium. I was shocked when the radio host came back on the air and continued to "tease" his listeners for a few more minutes before slipping in the truth. Of course my comment was easily verified by videos of the meeting.
Anyway, that's just one example of the mentality that starts taking over when folks jump on a bandwagon to discredit and "demonize" any individual. Just a reminder to all of us to be very careful - very careful...
That is....
Mon, 02/13/2012 - 08:23 — bpuli9999politics. Folks should know that before getting into it.
Why the controversy over what he said? Wasn't it being recorded?
And maybe start listening to Rush Limbaugh (or our own transplant Rush wannabe Lumaye) if you really want to learn how it is done.
Well said--I agree 100%.
Sat, 02/11/2012 - 18:27 — jenmanWell said--I agree 100%.
While the protestors'
Thu, 02/09/2012 - 22:41 — jeffrey1While the protestors' motives or purposes may be admirable and praiseworthy, their intent was still criminal. They may have felt they had no other option but to engage in civil disobedience, but they did so knowing the consequences associated with such acts. They did so with the expectation that they would be arrested and tried.
The possibility of an arrest record, and subsequent conviction, is one of the primary deterrents to acts of civil disobedience. Those deterrents are critical to the rule of law. While they don't prevent citizens from engaging in acts of civil disobedience, they insure that citizens don't undermine the law by encouraging general disobedience which is neither conscientious nor of social benefit. Therefore, conscientious lawbreakers must be punished.
THUS, BY YOUR LOGIC...
Fri, 02/10/2012 - 10:19 — ClearThinker...Martin Luther King should still be in jail. I guess this all spins on the word, "punishment." If by that you mean "throw the book at 'em," like funnyman Ron Margiotta wants, then its not punishment, it's vengeance. If a fair judge determines that it was just for the purpose of challenging social policy, and in his/her judgment, the defendents are otherwise responsible citizens (no criminal records, etc.), then the judge can determine a measured punishment, based on the situation.
Yes, there should be punishment, but our court system should not be used as a right-wing vengeance chamber for Ronny Margiotta's personal piques.
Absurd
Fri, 02/10/2012 - 10:38 — Bob_SconceWhat crime did King commit where the punishment would have extended into 2012?
EASY...
Fri, 02/10/2012 - 15:27 — ClearThinker...having an arrest and conviction on your record. That's just as good as being in jail for the rest of your life. Rev. Barber wouldn't worry about that because he has a job he doesn't have to worry about getting fired from, and that's getting on the nerves of righties like you!
But for those students who were following their social conscious, having a lifelong arrest record based on nothing other than protest, is counterproductive. Find punishmentthem guilty, remand them to community service and a fine, and at the completion of their punishment, remove the infraction from their record.
Have a problem with that?
Aahh...
Fri, 02/10/2012 - 16:06 — Bob_SconceSo, when you said "Martin Luther King would still be in jail," you really means "Martin Luther King wouldn't still be in jail, but would have a criminal record," which he had anyway. Gotcha.
Have a problem with that?
No, if you read back to what I said earlier, I think that the students should be allowed to do some community service and have their records expunged. I don't even think they need a fine, which their parents would probably pay anyway.
BETCHA...
Fri, 02/10/2012 - 17:28 — ClearThinker...Uncle Ronny doesn't feel that way, and betcha he'd want to keep Rev. Barber AND Dr. King in jail for as long as he could. Afterall, Margiotta is from the "old" school...meaning old neighborhood school.
This is a great
Thu, 02/09/2012 - 17:44 — truthBtolduse of our court system, Lord knows we must protect ourselves from Anarchy ! Sleep well Uncle Ron (et.al). Justice is being served.
Yes it is.
Thu, 02/09/2012 - 18:10 — midtownmomI'm glad you agree. People are not allowed to take over board meetings, wether public or private. In every other arena these protestors would be taken to court.
and in some other countries......
Thu, 02/09/2012 - 19:10 — VillageMentalityNot only court but killed or jailed outright.
They deserve court and prosecution to the fullest extent. Most of these folks had no business at a school board meeting, the county they neither reside nor have children in....
?
Thu, 02/09/2012 - 17:59 — Bob_SconceIf you're not going to enforce the laws, you may as well not have them at all.
That's A Reasonable Argument
Fri, 02/10/2012 - 00:07 — chaboard.......in the context of torture or securities fraud or other serious crimes. It's a pretty silly argument in the context of common or non-serious stuff. If one were to take it seriously then it would only take 5 minutes watching traffic on I-40 to conclude we should not have speeding or tailgating laws. Clearly the logic fails.
Fact is, selective and sporadic enforcement is the only way MOST of our laws CAN work. And this is a perfect time for a little common sense and selective enforcement.
A $25 fine sounds like a reasonable punishment that balances the need for *some* consequences with the primacy of non-violent political speech.
No...
Fri, 02/10/2012 - 07:58 — Bob_SconceSpeeding and tailgating laws are still enforced. Sure, we don't have enough cops to catch every speeder, but that's really not relevant. It's rare for them to let somebody go once they're caught.
One of the reasons (but not the only one) we have criminal law is for deterrence. If you don't enforce the laws in public cases like this one, then people will make the assumption that they can do the same thing and get the same consequences.
I don't think $25 is reasonable -- in this case, it's a wink and a nod. I think I recall that these were class 2 misdemeanors, which are punishable by up to 30 days in jail. To me, 10 days in jail and a $1000 fine seems appropriate for the ringleaders. The juveniles should get a bit more leniency -- do 100 hours actual community service and get the offense expunged.
(Of course, I don't expect them to actually get that much -- Barber's fine may be as much as $1000, but I'd be quite surprised if he actually got jail time.)
Actually, a $14,000 fine
Fri, 02/10/2012 - 07:39 — loriacActually, a $14,000 fine would be reasonable to pay for the extra security costs entailed because of their actions. However, that doesn't begin to make up for all the people's time they wasted - all those folks who ended up not being able to speak that day, the delayi in the board meeting.
A $25 fine sounds like a
Fri, 02/10/2012 - 02:35 — jeffrey1A $25 fine sounds like a reasonable punishment that balances the need for *some* consequences with the primacy of non-violent political speech.
Hell, if that were the case, I'd be the first person in line to hand over a C-note, and disrupt the next 4 meetings. I'd enlist a few like minded friends, and the board wouldn't see a peaceful meeting for the next year.