Home > Uncategorized > Fortuna Woman Files Suit to Defend First Amendment Rights

Fortuna Woman Files Suit to Defend First Amendment Rights

ImageTwo months after it pooped on the US Constitution, Humboldt County’s Board of Supervisors has finally been sued over its courthouse protest “urgency ordinance.” The Board and county staff purport the ordinance was in response to health and safety issues.

Among other things, the ordinance established a nightly curfew at the courthouse grounds and made it illegal to hang a protest sign at the courthouse.

Janelle Egger, one of several people arrested solely for being present at the courthouse during a candlelight vigil on April 7th, has filed a complaint with the federal courts, charging the ordinance violates the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.  Two Korea/Vietnam era veterans were also arrested by the Sheriff’s deputies that evening, for sitting in lawn chairs on the steps of the courthouse.

The ordinance was passed on March 27 by a 4-1 vote of the Board of Supervisors, Mark Lovelace dissenting.  Because the ordinance purported to be in response to a health and safety emergency, it took effect immediately rather than after a normal review period.

Egger, who lives with her husband in Fortuna where they raised two children, has been active at the courthouse for several months.  Assistance and financial support for the filing came from the Humboldt County Civil Liberties Defense Fund.

[Note: “Mitch” also assisted Egger with some research.]

  1. unanonymous
    May 25, 2012 at 9:00 am

    Egger, same lady who sued City of Fortuna over public records. A true Californian.

  2. Mitch
    May 25, 2012 at 9:26 am

    A true American, willing to be arrested in defense of the Constitution.

    Same as the vets.

    I am in awe of them all, and grateful for their service. I am ashamed of the behavior of the supervisors, with the exception of Lovelace.

  3. HUUFC
    May 25, 2012 at 9:27 am

    How much cash will she get this time?

  4. Mitch
    May 25, 2012 at 9:29 am

    I believe the only cash relief requested is court costs.

  5. Anonymous
    May 25, 2012 at 9:38 am

    If people like HUUFC valued civil liberties as much as they do money and held politicians accountable at the ballot box for violations, there would be no need for court cases and monetary awards.

  6. Anonymous
    May 25, 2012 at 9:40 am

    If the one of the original purposes of the protests was in regard to the economy , why is someone suing and creating more economic problems for Humbold County ? I am wondering how many Deputy Sherrif’s have been taken away from areas of the County where they could be patrolling instead of having to deal with violations of the law at the Courthouse ? I am also wondering if the citizens of Humboldt County have any rights . If anyone has a right to complain , it is the County Employees at the Courthouse and yet I have not seen any of them file a lawsuit . I see no reason why anyone should be allowed to be at the Courthouse 24 hours per day 7 days per week protesting . I commend the Board Of Supervisors for passing the ordinance and I think that it is time for the citizens of Humblodt County to back them up .

  7. erniebranscomb
    May 25, 2012 at 9:47 am

    The Supes took a lazy, and very unconstitutional way out of dealing with the courthouse protest. They should have known better and they should have been able to predict a lawsuit.

    There are ample laws already on the books to deal with every issue presented by the protesters. Foolish, Foolish Fooolish.

    Lovelace was the only one to show any wisdom. Thanks Mark!

  8. Mitch
    May 25, 2012 at 9:59 am

    9:40,

    Someone is suing because if you don’t defend the Constitution, you lose what makes America a country worth defending.

    The costs of responding to this lawsuit should come directly from the salaries of the Board of Supervisors, the CAO, and especially County Counsel.

  9. May 25, 2012 at 10:05 am

    “Mitch says:
    May 25, 2012 at 9:26 am

    A true American, willing to be arrested in defense of the Constitution.

    Same as the vets.

    I am in awe of them all, and grateful for their service. I am ashamed of the behavior of the supervisors, with the exception of Lovelace.

    Mitch says:
    May 25, 2012 at 9:59 am

    9:40,

    Someone is suing because if you don’t defend the Constitution, you lose what makes America a country worth defending.

    The costs of responding to this lawsuit should come directly from the salaries of the Board of Supervisors, the CAO, and especially County Counsel.”

    A-freakin’-men

    PS
    The city and county are going to loose more money over beating the protester and denying it and denying him medical treatment.

  10. Boris
    May 25, 2012 at 10:19 am

    We do not have these problems in Moscow. Freedom of Commerce is our most cherished civil liberty. Without this freedom, what use are the others? Mr. High Finance has tried to help you Traitor-Americans understand this.

  11. Mitch
    May 25, 2012 at 11:23 am

    It’s hard to tell, Boris, whether Humboldt was acting more in the spirit of modern day Russia. modern day China, or — sadly — modern day America.

    All three countries are now kleptocracies, probably run by the same people. (Not the same type of people, mind you — the same people.)

  12. Harold Knight
    May 25, 2012 at 11:32 am

    After 20+ years I finally got to see Milquetoast Jimmy Smith get worked-up about something.

    What a sad way to end any long career.

  13. Harold Knight
    May 25, 2012 at 11:34 am

    Do we send our checks to the Civil Liberties Defense Fund?

  14. unanonymous
    May 25, 2012 at 12:08 pm

    the constitution doesn’t defend your right to shit on public buildings, or infringe my rights to walk into public buildings, or to harass people, or cause a public health and safety nuisance. It is good to see the neo-libs start thinking about the constitution though. pity they missed that class while toking in the playground.

  15. Smart 5th Grader
    May 25, 2012 at 12:15 pm

    unanon 12:08 You’re a Hater!

  16. Mitch
    May 25, 2012 at 12:16 pm

    That’s precisely right, unanonymous. People who shit on public buildings should be arrested. So should people who harass others and people who cause a public health and safety nuisance.

    What public health and safety nuisance is caused by the simple act of being present at the courthouse grounds at 9:45 PM, or hanging a sign on a fence at 9:45 AM and then standing beside it?

  17. unanonymous
    May 25, 2012 at 12:18 pm

    yes, I hate people shitting on public buildings…….how about you? you like shit on your public buildings?

  18. tra
    May 25, 2012 at 12:18 pm

    All those things were already against the law, 12:08, and the lawsuit isn’t challenging any of those laws. This lawsuit is happening because instead of actually enforcing those laws, the government decided to use those kinds of problems as an excuse to create a new law that bans candlelight vigils and some other common forms of constitutionally-protected free speech.

  19. unanonymous
    May 25, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    being present is not what I observed. I think it was called camping…….. sorry not allowed. go to the woods to camp.

  20. Mitch
    May 25, 2012 at 12:26 pm

    unanonymous,

    People were arrested in November for camping on the courthouse lawn. One was convicted the day after the urgency ordinance passed (or maybe the day it passed). The ordinance had nothing to do with that. If you think it did, maybe you need to study the situation a bit more.

    There was no camping on the lawn after November. It’s not legal to camp on downtown office building lawns. No ordinance is needed to establish that fact.

  21. unanonymous
    May 25, 2012 at 12:44 pm

    no they were camping on the sidewalk, or actually under the stairs as I remember. shitting, breaking into nearby houses, vandalizing cars, drug use, threatening users of the court house. That is a nuisance and public safety hazard. As for signs, is it ok for walmart to come down and hang signs on public property to advertize, of course not. To stand with a hand held sign, yes. get it?
    People have the right to petition their government, not to camp on it and harass the public under the guise of liberty.

  22. Smart 5th Grader
    May 25, 2012 at 12:45 pm

    Awww, you’re a Hater!

  23. unanonymous
    May 25, 2012 at 12:48 pm

    yup, I hate shit on public buildings. Wanna go shit on a school? lol

  24. Mitch
    May 25, 2012 at 12:58 pm

    unanonymous,

    Anyone who camps on the sidewalk can be arrested and could have been arrested before the ordinance. Anyone who camps under the stairs at the courthouse can be arrested and could have been arrested before the ordinance. Anyone who shits in public, vandalizes cars, breaks into homes, harasses others, etc… can be arrested and could have been arrested before the ordinance.

    There are mentally ill homeless people wandering the streets of Eureka. Perhaps they found a sense of safety from police brutality by staying in an area with 24 hour witnesses? Perhaps it’s more likely that they might have defecated in public than that the protesters did?

    The Sheriff’s email declining to respond to the situation at the courthouse is a matter of public record. The comments of the security guard at the courthouse that the protesters were no problem is a matter of public record. There is a Sheriff’s office at the courthouse.

    Why would you want to go shit on a school, unanonymous? I don’t understand.

  25. Mitch
    May 25, 2012 at 1:03 pm

    As for signs, the code for commercial speech is not the same as the code for political speech. His little snit fit over that simple reality is part of why the Sheriff abandoned his public safety responsibilities.

  26. 2 cents
    May 25, 2012 at 1:19 pm

    Thanks, to Jannelle and most of you.
    9:40 – the Police have not been drawn away from their duties because they have needed to “deal with violations of the law” at the courthouse. They have NOT done that. They have chosen not to enforce those laws which involve protecting the public (including the courthouse employees and/or the Occupiers).
    The have spent their energy tearing down signs, disrespecting the constitution and the citizenry. They have wasted resources to oppress, but not to protect, anything (well, the status quo maybe).
    They are working on expanding this ordinance to include all county property too…..
    AND, I see no reason why there should not be protestors at the courthouse 24/7, so we balance one another out.

  27. HUUFC
    May 25, 2012 at 1:22 pm

    Yawn, Egger can walk up and down fourth and fifth street all day and night with a sandwitch board with messages on the front and back about how unfair and wrong the ordinance is. Instead she files suit.

  28. Mitch
    May 25, 2012 at 1:36 pm

    HUUFC,

    It’s attitudes like yours that demonstrate how democracies collapse.

    The courthouse grounds are the ultimate example of a traditional public forum. Even the backwards supreme court currently afflicting the country is bound by precedent to acknowledge that such areas are where free speech is protected most highly from government intervention.

    You cannot force people from such an area just because OTHERS may threaten public defecation or because a Sheriff stages a snit fit. Not in our country.

    The Board of Supervisors or their counsel thought they could sell cyanide by mixing it with sugar. No amount of sugar mixed in removes the cyanide. Nothing prevents the ordinance from being unconstitutional poison to a democracy.

  29. tra
    May 25, 2012 at 1:38 pm

    HUUFC,

    Perhaps that’s because a lawsuit will bring the issue squarely before a court of law, which has the power decide whether certain provisions of this ordinance are constitutionally allowable or not and overturn them if they aren’t…whereas wearing a sandwich board will not bring the issue before a court of law and the issue of whether the law is constitutionally valid or not will remain unresolved.

  30. May 25, 2012 at 1:51 pm

    Harold Knight ? Could this be another, tra,…. er i mean, Heraldo ? Only time will tell

  31. May 25, 2012 at 1:52 pm

    #Occupiers have the right to free speech, and they take full advantage of it. The idea that it is being abridged because they can’t homestead the Courthouse is ludicrous.

    They have the right to petition their government, as do we all. They have the right to write letters to the editor, as do we all. They have the right to design and print all manner of printed materials including flyers, letters to fellow citizens and elected officials, ads in newspapers, magazines and other publications. They can even start their own publication. They can buy ads to get their message out on radio and TV.

    They have cellphones, websites, email, blogs, Facebook, Twitter and livestreaming, which #Occupy all over the world takes full advantage of.

    In short – they have more free speech than anyone in the history of the world. Long gone are the days of having to xerox flyers. No one – no one – has done anything to take away their right to free speech.

    The only thing the Board of Supervisors (including Mark Lovelace) has done is ask that they exercise some level of decorum and respect for others, and for public property.

    The idea that being asked to go home at night infringes on their free speech – laughable. Get real.

  32. Mitch
    May 25, 2012 at 2:01 pm

    I see, Rose.

    So as long as people have the right to write a letter to the editor or use their cell phones it is OK to ban them from the courthouse at 9:30 PM.

    I knew there was a reason Twitter was important.

  33. May 25, 2012 at 2:02 pm

    Wow! Rose actually said respect for others.

  34. tra
    May 25, 2012 at 2:03 pm

    Redeye must be unaware of the rather lengthy disagreement I had with “Harold Knight” on an earlier thread about the Occupy protests:

    https://humboldtherald.wordpress.com/2011/12/06/da-presser-on-occupy-eureka/

    Redeye must also be unaware of the many differences of opinion I’ve had with Heraldo on numerous topics on this blog over the past several years.

  35. tra
    May 25, 2012 at 2:06 pm

    Rose,

    Before the passage of the “urgency” ordinance, people were allowed to hold a candlelight vigil on the courthouse steps, even at midnight. Now they are not. Therefore people have at least one less avenue for free speech than they did before the passage of the ordinance. There is simply no disputing that fact.

  36. Just Watchin
    May 25, 2012 at 2:44 pm

    You people are at the top of your class in wasting time and money. Y’all make the people of Greece look smart.

  37. Anonymous
    May 25, 2012 at 2:45 pm

    Its quite obvious the County Board of Supervisors is not running the County properly. This suit, Housing for all suit, HumCPR suit, Forster-Gill suit (2), McKinleyville suit, a GP suit, McKee suit…and so on. My guess is the Board has followed staff advise a little too much and the Board does not read the laws and rules but blindly follows there staff experts into the Court rooms.
    Vote out all incumbents….its the only way to take back your government.

  38. Harold Knight
    May 25, 2012 at 3:11 pm

    Thanks for the reminder tra.

    Now, can you please explain which of “yesterday’s tactics and strategies supporters should be mindful of not working today” in regards to the current Eureka occupy movement.

    It would appear that the old-timey tactics still work when people are persistent.

  39. May 25, 2012 at 3:14 pm

    tra must be unaware that however clever he may be ( & he is clever ) disagreeing with yourself to make everybody think your two seperate people is just another one of your brilliant ( & you are brilliant ) ideas .

  40. tra
    May 25, 2012 at 3:18 pm

    That’s an impressive level of paranoia, Redeye. Perhaps if you could dial back that paranoia a bit, you’d get a bit more sleep and your eyes wouldn’t be as red.

  41. tra
    May 25, 2012 at 3:24 pm

    Well Harold, last fall Occupy Eureka was maintaining a 24 hour vigil at the courthouse (as is their right to do, a right I fully support), and today they are still maintaining a 24 hour vigil at the courthouse. So yes, they are certainly being “persistent.” And I do admire their tenacity. But the question is: Is that tactic still “working” as well as it did in the first few months, in terms of attracting attention and support to their cause?

  42. tra
    May 25, 2012 at 3:35 pm

    And I have nothing against “old-timey” tactics. I just think that sometimes it’s wise to vary tactics, old-timey or otherwise, from time to time, rather than just doing the same thing day after day –especially if the same thing you’ve been doing day after day seems to be yielding diminishing returns (or no returns) in terms of drawing more supporters to your cause.

    Of course if you think that’s not the situation, and that doggedly pursuing the single tactic is (or eventually will) produce the results you want, then of course there’s nothing wrong with just keepin’ on keepin’ on.

    At any rate, it’s up to the individuals maintaining the vigil to decide whether they’re using their time well or not. I certainly don’t hold it against them for continuing to do what they’re doin…I just don’t have a lot of hope that they’re really making much difference. I hope I’m wrong.

  43. Anonymous
    May 25, 2012 at 7:02 pm

    “I just think that sometimes it’s wise to vary tactics, old-timey or otherwise, from time to time, rather than just doing the same thing day after day –especially if the same thing you’ve been doing day after day seems to be yielding diminishing returns (or no returns) in terms of drawing more supporters to your cause.”

    You are the diminishing (non)return you describe.

  44. Goldie
    May 25, 2012 at 7:33 pm

    This is a story I read or heard once and it has always stayed with me. There was a guy who showed up everyday with a sign that expressed his opinion that war did not bring peace and that the US should get out of Vietnam. He was asked years later if he thought his sign changed anyone’s mind about the war and he said that was not the point. He said the point was not that he change their minds but rather he was making sure that ‘they’ did not change him. He wanted to remind himself everyday that war was not the way to peace.
    Have you changed, distracted by the poop and pee at the bank horse and pony show, or the complications of unstable folks drawn to a safe spot, or the tantrums of a sheriff who decides not to uphold the law and see to the safety of the citizens? First Amendment Rights matter especially in complicated times.

  45. High Finance
    May 25, 2012 at 8:24 pm

    Most of you are making the same mistake over and over and over again.

    This homeless camp on the sidewalk in front of the Courthouse has nothing to do with “Free Speech”. They aren’t protesting anything, they are having a party every day. Nothing more.

  46. 2 cents
    May 25, 2012 at 9:30 pm

    Income disparity between the classes is the primary issue of ‘Occupy’s worldwide. That here in Humboldt homelessness is made more visible by the vigil at the Courthouse makes perfect sense. Why wouldn’t this group attach themselves? Homelessness is where income disparity is most obvious here ‘in paradise’……
    Fix the problem, don’t turn the victims into criminals.
    This issue exposes, as a society, our moral bankruptcy.

  47. Harold Knight
    May 25, 2012 at 10:34 pm

    “But the question is: Is that tactic still “working” as well as it did in the first few months, in terms of attracting attention and support to their cause?” (tra).

    No, that is NOT the question, but a silly distraction.

    In fact, that small rag-tag group who’s persistence you question as being ineffective, has caused an uproar not seen before at the courthouse, it created unheard-of enforcement conflicts between the DA and Sheriff, it provided Jimmy Smith something to get passionate about after 20 years, it motivated the supervisors to infringe on the U.S. Constitution and a citizen’s lawsuit to fight back. Women in Black and V.F.P. have been protesting for nearly a decade without a fraction of the controversy and media attention….by all accounts, Occupy Eureka has been effective beyond question….except for tra.

    I must applaud “Goldie” for the enlightened point she made and add that “tactics” have remained unchanged for most of the nation’s history.

    Occupy Eureka’s small group, in a rural town, in an isolated county, have worked a tiny miracle that perfectly complement the growing national discord.

    Did you not even show up with 200 others to confront the recent counter-occupy flop, tra?

  48. May 25, 2012 at 10:36 pm

    This homeless camp on the sidewalk in front of the Courthouse has nothing to do with “Free Speech”. They aren’t protesting anything, they are having a party every day. Nothing more.

    And yet the supes responded by passing an ordinance that restricted free speech. They missed the mark by a mile.

  49. tra
    May 25, 2012 at 11:47 pm

    Harold said: “No, that is NOT the question.”

    I know this is painful for you to accept, Harold, but in a free society other people get to decide for themselves which questions are relevant. Since you cannot seem to grasp that very fundamental concept, it’s hard to have any kind of meaningful discussion. But since you obviously believe that you already have all the answers and since, according to you, “by all accounts” everyone else other than me already agrees with you 100% that OE has been “effective beyond question,” clearly there’s really nothing for us to discuss.

  50. tra
    May 26, 2012 at 12:03 am

    For those a bit less close-minded, I would invite them to imagine that someone named “Harold” invited them to become part of an ongoing 24 hour vigil in solidarity with the Occupy Wall Street movement, and when asked what the local group was focused on and what they had accomplished so far, Harold proudly answered that this campaign had been “effective beyond question,” since they had:

    “caused an uproar not seen before at the courthouse,”

    “created unheard-of enforcement conflicts between the DA and Sheriff”

    “provided [a county supervisor] something to get passionate about after 20 years,” and

    “motivated the supervisors to infringe on the U.S. Constitution.”

    How many of you would be inspired to get involved in this effort based on these “accomplishments?”

    Judging by the fact that the number of signs with nobody to hold them seems to outnumber the number of actual protesters by a factor of at least 10:1, it seems that the answer is…not very many.

  51. tra
    May 26, 2012 at 12:29 am

    Nevertheless, I certainly agree that the so-called “urgency ordinance” was a stupid, unnecessary, and disgraceful display of unconstitutional overreach on the part of the four county supervisors who voted for it, and I hope that the courts clearly and forcefully reject and nullify the free-speech-limiting provisions of this ordinance.

  52. Mitch
    May 26, 2012 at 9:32 am

    Unfortunately, there is a wide chasm between knowing how broken our system is and having a feasible and positive path towards making it better.

    Occupy Eureka gets on people’s nerves because it forces into public view a problem people would rather deny — the presence of a substantial number of homeless and mentally ill people on the streets. I don’t think that was anyone’s plan, but it’s what’s happened.

    The response to having that problem pushed in our collective face is up to US, not Occupy Eureka. So far, the Board of Supervisor’s attempt at a response has been to try to shove the problem back under the rug.

    That’s not a solution.

    The solution could start with a reexamination of the local programs meant to assist the homeless and mentally ill.

    The local press could start by finding out, in depth, how much money is spent on programs for the homeless and mentally ill, how much of that money actually goes to the homeless and mentally ill, and how much of that money goes to to the welfare-program-for-bad-managers that is the DHHS.

    More than one percent of Humboldt County’s adult population is employed by the county’s Department of Health and Human Services, yet it is incapable of properly dealing with any problem due to the management disaster that has been created there.

    Think about this for a moment: more than one percent of our adult population is working for the DHHS, there are homeless mentally ill people in front of the center of government for months on end, apparently causing great distress to government workers, yet the Department only sends a worker to the courthouse a week or so before the Board is going to try to paper over the problem, so that it looks like the county has tried other approaches.

    The local universities and high schools could start studying alternative approaches to responding to this particular disaster; students who otherwise find school boring might suddenly perk up when they notice that their education is connected to actually making things better for people, as opposed to making them better wage-slaves.

    The local religious communities could challenge one another to make the plight of the homeless and mentally ill part of their daily consciousness, and could work to integrate themselves with such people in ways that go beyond providing money.

    The local politicians could shake up the electorate, pointing out what an awful statement we make about ourselves every day that we allow the current situation to remain.

    I would vote in a flash for any Board candidate who promised to fire the entire top management of the Department of Health and Human Services, and who would promise to fire the next top management unless they could show, within two years, that the Department had made demonstrable progress towards solving a problem, any problem.

    If that cycle repeated three times, I would want the Board to disband the department, lay off its entire staff, and bring in an outside, private sector organization to try. Because repeating what fails is nuts.

    But firing the people in charge is harder than continuing with the status quo, so until a Board is elected that is willing to shake things up in the county’s ineffectual departments, nothing will change. And no useful Board will be elected as long as voters are comfortable with the status quo.

    Occupy Eureka makes voters less comfortable.

    In my opinion, that’s a good thing.

  53. May 26, 2012 at 11:24 am

    The County Board of Supervisors is responsible for this ordinance. Their staff,, trying to please them, helped them do the wrong thing. They told their staff they wanted the mess cleaned up and the staff tried to help. Some members of EPD were glad to help.

    If you watched the ACLU sponsored 1st district debate last night you might have seen that Occupy Eureka has succeeded in raising the issue of the homeless beyond the clear-them-out approach. At least these three candidates thought looking for other solutions an acceptable thing to talk about.

    That none of the candidates understood that the Board of Sups, not Occupy Eureka, is infringing on our Constitutional rights is of concern. The Board passed it because their staff said they could. Not one current member to ask for a report on any constitutional concerns. For staff, that isn’t a problem until someone sues.

    There is never a solution if you don’t see the problem.

    Rose, You exercise your First Amendment rights any old, or new, way you wish. Just keep your thorns off my rights.

    The same to the rest of you who think I am the problem because I was forced to file a lawsuit to get the Board to stop for a moment and think about what they did.

  54. Auntie Arkley
    May 26, 2012 at 11:47 am

    Wow, the above right-wingers have no understanding of the United States Constitution. Get a fucking brain (or just pull your head out of your ass).

  55. May 26, 2012 at 12:20 pm

    On her blog Rose wrote:
    … they’ve filed a suit, because the Board of Supervisors, after months of tolerance and inaction, in desperation, “established a nightly curfew at the courthouse.”

    Because the agitators had set up permanent camps, bringing in pallets and more, blocking access, and generally defiling both the courthouse grounds and surrounding businesses. (The #Occupoopers video came out of Humboldt County.). They weren’t exactly the usual polite crowd.

    The Courthouse has been the site of many a protest, and all prior protest groups have followed ‘rules.’ Hand-held signs, no permanent fixtures, no blocking the sidewalks, etc.

    The most decorous, and respectful are the Women In Black, who come on Fridays, stand in mute protest for a few hours, and leave.

    Even these guys are relatively few in number except at rush hour and lunch-time, when whoever is calling the shots knows they get the most visibility.

    There’s no REASON to stay the night for months on end – and the really funny part – Tom, you’ll appreciate this – the really funny part is – if any one of those guys had an actual JOB where they were ASKED to put in some extra hours, sit out in the freezing rain, with no breaks and no facilities, why, if such a thing were to happen, they would sue. And if they were willing to work that hard, they probably WOULD have a job, Tom, and probably WOULD have somewhere to go at night.

    C’mon – get real. This is not Iran or Afghanistan. You don’t get killed for speaking your mind. You have all the aforementioned avenues at your disposal, and you can – and HAVE – said all manner of things about elected officials – I say again, NO ONE has taken away anyone’s right to free speech.
    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
    Dear Rose, You need another source of information besides Murl Harpham, or whoever is feeding you this fantasy. You don’t have to be polite to exercise Free Speech; it is maybe in some cases more effective, but not a requirement. It is often anger and frustration that drives people to speak out.

    Not all prior protest groups have followed the rules that the police tried to impose, probably at the request of the county, on Occupy Eureka. Women in Black and Vets for Peace have hung signs on County property for years. Women in Black had their signs removed from the fence but the Vets were ok until the ordinance passed. There were two Vets arrested the same evening I was arrested.

    I was there in the middle of the night, I take offense with your comments.

    There have been huge protests, banners hung on the railing by the Courthouse door… Oh, please just use google images and see for yourself.

    So, if the police merely handcuff people while they “confiscate” for no apparent reason a demonstration’s property it is ok because no one was hurt? Are you saying I should agree to speak where and when and publish my words in the size and manner approved. In other words, just accept that the powers that be will always know the best way for me to exercise my First Amendment rights? Maybe, if they follow the rules; but they have not.

    They have indeed abridged my rights. If you are content with simply publishing an anonymous blog, that is your business.

  56. 2 cents
    May 26, 2012 at 5:33 pm

    Janelle – YOU ROCK!

  57. What Now
    May 26, 2012 at 6:17 pm

    Great post, Ms. Egger.
    Thank you.

  58. Harold Knight
    May 26, 2012 at 9:39 pm

    Well done Janelle…put to rest the naysayers! Thank you for holding our representatives responsible for their actions!

    Occupy Eureka has been a success for the attention and reaction that a small group has generated in a short time in this rural, isolated county.

    In an era when half this nation’s eligible voters cannot even motivate themselves to register and vote, the accomplishments of OE’s heroic few is historic. Our grossly uninformed citizens are struggling mightily to maintain their “positive” economic fantasies despite half the U.S. population being at risk of entering poverty, according to the 2010 Census.

    Just one more little catalyst, and every other American might start occupying every courthouse in the nation.

    Every social justice movement in our history faced similar critics and detractors claiming to be “supporters”, even from within the movements themselves.

    It’s an organic process with identical tactics that no one can be sure of the outcome. But, one thing is for sure….we always look back with regret that we didn’t support and join the protests sooner.

  59. Tack Spayer
    May 27, 2012 at 6:41 am

    Finally, a lawsuit I can pay for to find out the meaning of the word “emergency”. It will probably cost millions that could be spent on services, but at least the board of supes won’t have to admit they were wrong. They will wait until a judge tells them, then sign the check.

  60. Tack Spayer
    May 27, 2012 at 6:43 am

    If you are content with simply publishing an anonymous blog, that is your business – Janelle.

    –My Nomination for Quote of the Year.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s