[NYTr] Jackboot State Stubs Toe in Ann Arbor: Wilkerson Acquitted

[All the News That Doesn't Fit]

Counterpunch - Dec 4, 2007
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn12042007.html

Jackboot State Stubs Its Toe in Ann Arbor: Wilkerson Acquitted

By ALEXANDER COCKBURN

A jury in Ann Arbor, Michigan took four and a half hours on the evening
of December 3 to acquit Catherine Wilkerson of two criminal misdemeanor
charges stemming from an incident in November 2006. Wilkerson's alleged
"crimes" consisted of intervening to assist an unconscious man who in
her estimate was in grave risk of asphyxiation after an Ann Arbor cop
had inflicted unnecessary and sadistic force, and a paramedic had
compounded the brutality by breaking three ampoules of ammonia under
the unconscious man's nose, saying, "You don't like that, do you."

The entire case is a parable of current trends: the criminalization of
free speech; prosecutions intended to chill lawful protest;
out-of-control police conduct; a spaniel press; and most sinister of
all, a witch-hunting posture towards anything a cop or a prosecutor can
construe as "radical terrorism". This posture is embodied in its most
sinister guise by the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2007, passed by the House of Representatives by a
vote of 404-6 earlier this year and now under review by a committee of
the U.S. Senate.

Catherine Wilkerson runs a medical clinic for poor people in Ann Arbor.
She was not arrested in the November 30, 2006 episode, which I
described here last week as the case went to trial. The charges came
later, clearly at the instigation of the University of Michigan and
intended as a warning that exercise of First Amendment rights of free
speech and protest would be dealt with harshly. Although Wilkerson was
acquitted we should note that she spent unpleasant months awaiting her
days in court, aware that a guilty verdict could have grave
professional consequences. In a just world the president of the
University of Michigan, Mary Sue Coleman, who signed off on this
malicious witch hunt by her campus cops, working in cahoots with the
Ann Arbor PD, would now spend as many months as Wilkerson wondering
whether she had a professional future.

Both the campus cops and the Ann Arbor PD conducted themselves in a
manner that should have resulted, should still result, in officers
being disciplined or dismissed. Seven weeks after the November 2006
incident the campus police compiled a report stuffed with lies,
designed to persuade the credulous that at least six armed police
enforcers, somehow stood at risk from Wilkerson, as one of their
number--a hulking brute--sadistically inflicted PPCT tactics on his
physically slight and unresisting captive. "PPCT" stands for Pressure
Point Control Tactics, the application of pressure to selected points
on the victim's head and neck. As complacently described on one site,
"The application of these pressure points is to control passive or
defensive resistance and are highly effective no matter what the size
or strength level of the officer." "Passive resistance" in this case
meant no resistance at all, a state duly rewarded by the punitive
application of ammonia to the victim by a medical tech complicit in
this exercise of "law enforcement".

It should be noted that a vigilant press could have torn this report to
shreds and possibly averted the prosecution that followed. The Ann
Arbor News's reporting, as well as that of the Michigan Daily, was
disgraceful from start to finish, to a level that objective assessment
can justifiably stigmatize as complicity with the police and barely
concealed hostility to Wilkerson, very possibly because her political
activities have included solidarity with the Palestinian cause. This
depressing example of shoddy journalism was balanced by very useful
internet reporting before and during the trial done by the Committee to
Defend Catherine Wilkerson.

The jackboot state in its local guise here took the form of the
Washtenaw County Prosecutor, Brian Mackie, and assistant prosecutor
Margaret Connors who, incredibly, tried to add additional charges
before and during the trial. Remember that this entire legal arsenal
was brought to bear on a woman who at no point did anything other than
offer verbal medical advice aimed at protecting the life of an
unconscious man in danger of asphyxiation. During the trial Connors
made frequent efforts to demonstrate to the jury that defense witness
bore the taint of having been involved in radical activities--otherwise
known as lawful exercise of rights of free speech and assembly,
including efforts to defend Wilkerson's rights. To quote from the
Committee to Defend's daily web report,

    During cross-examination of the witnesses who came to protest last
year, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Margaret Connors highlighted the
political motivations of this prosecution by frequently asking
protesters about their protest history as if regularly exercising your
First Amendment rights somehow makes you an untrustworthy 'repeat
offender.' This is a police state mentality, pure and simple, one where
criticizing the government makes you a suspect when your testimony
contradicts the official story of police and prosecutor. At times,
Connors' courtroom antics have been laughable but there is nothing
funny about the (mis)use of state power to silence or punish government
critics. One witness was also excluded at the prosecution's request due
to involvement with these updates and defendwilkerson.org,
demonstrating what we already knew-police and prosecutors cruise the
internet and use it to collect 'criminal intelligence.'

    "Heroes: Bill Wilkerson, [Catherine's husband] who taught me about
Ho Chi Minh, another hero and about the immorality of the US war
against Vietnam." The prosecutor made specific reference to Ho Chi Minh
and his status as a hero. The intent of this line of questioning seemed
to be to stress Dr. Wilkerson's politics in an effort discredit her and
her fellow protesters as dishonest radicals who contrived the whole
incident last year as "political theater."

The defense seems to have been fortunate in having a reasonable judge,
Elizabeth Pollard-Hines, and--above all--a jury which had no difficulty
in throwing out the absurd charges and discounting Connors' accusations
and inferences. Wilkerson's lead attorney Buck Davis opened his final
speech to the jury about telling them they should thank Wilkerson for
giving them opportunity to defend the US constitution and that the
University of Michigan and Washtenaw County Prosecutor Brian Mackie
were trying to criminalize speech and protest. So they were. In this
instance they failed, albeit against a darkening national backdrop.

On October 23, 2007, the House of Representatives passed the Violent
Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 by a vote
of 404-6. The nays were: Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA),
Neil Abercrombie (D-HI), Jerry Costello (D-IL), Dennis Kucinich (D-OH),
John Duncan (R-TN).

Where was Barbara Lee? She voted for it. Ron Paul? His staff says he
was campaigning in New Hampshire. Where were the other few protectors
of the Constitution?

There are many lessons in the Wilkerson case and her victory -- of
which the central one is solidarity: Wilkerson's fidelity to her
medical principles; her supporters' efforts in her defense; overall,
solidarity in support of the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights
against its many assailants.