THE COURT: Very well.
64
The court has received a series of motions, various motions, rather, by the defendants, on behalf of the defendants. The court has considered them and, to the extent there's been an opposition thereto, the opposition, and determined that the requirements of law require that they all be denied.
Now with respect to the matter of sentencing, each defendant has been here in the court this morning, has been given a full and complete opportunity to be heard and to respond to any claimed inaccuracies in the presentence investigation report, and to the allocation on the part of the United States through the Assistant United States Attorney, Mark DuBester.
With respect to Mr. William Thomas, also known as William A. Thomas, who claims a legal residence in Washington, D. C., it appears to the court without dispute that he is a gentleman of 40 years of age, having been born, by his own verification here this morning, in Tarrytown New York, approximately 40 years ago. He is married to his co defendant, Miss Ellen B. Thomas.
Obviously, Mr. Thomas is a gentleman who inspires and has inspired the respect of his co defendants in this case, and undoubtedly many others. It appears to the court that Mr. Thomas, by his admission, has served time in prison in the past some seven and a half years as I recall him saying
65
earlier today, and I also recall, the court also recalls Mr Thomas indirectly urging the court to the position of the time that he has spent previously for other offenses that he has spent in jail as debts to society for having committed those offenses. It appears that Mr. Thomas claims to have been arrested more times than which the probation officer is aware of, and the court notes in his favor that, since 1984, he apparently has not been arrested except for this pending case.
It appears from the records not only in the sentencing proceeding, but previously to this date, that the defendant William Thomas also engaged in a rather continuous dialogue with the National Park Service of the Department of Interior and its representatives in an effort to find out what he could or could not do at Lafayette Park. The fact, however, is that Mr. Thomasr regardless of his intentions or motivations, has been found guilty by this court based on the facts and the allegations that were set forth in the citation and his arrest. He stands exposed to a six month jail sentence and/or a fine of $500, or both, together with a $25 special mandatory assessment.
These defendants who have been engaging in these activitics in Lafayette Park for some period of time, as the court has already said, have been found guilty. Some of them have been given probationary type sentences, unsupervised
66
probation by various judges of this court. What has happened? They've gone right back and done the same thing again.
It appears to the court, Mr. Thomas, that what you're saying is that you're not going to change and really, it's not the office or the purpose of the court to ask you to change. The only thing the court's concerned about is whether you obeyed or disobeyed the law and, in connection with the sentence I impose this morning, whether it can reasonabiy expect that you will obey the law in the future. If it is your intention to go right back up to Lafayette park from Third & Constitution Avenue and do what you've been doing all along, and if that's contrary to the regulations or found to be, and is in essence a so called petty offense or a crime, then probation isn't going to do any good.
One of the fundamental purposes of sentencing in our criminal jurisprudence in this country, which we inherited from England, is deterrence. Whether you can be deterred by virtue of a sentence or incarceraticn, I don't know, but I do know this: that sentences of incarceration to jail, together with fines, is said, by virtue of our history not only in this country but in England, to be a deterrent to others against commission of the same of similar offenses.
Now, I think there are sone mitigating circumstances in your case. I don't hold it against you or any of your
67
co-defendants for exercising your rights to the extent that those rights are consistent with law under the First Amendment. As a matter of fact, this member of the court believes and hopes that it would be the last judge in the United States to impair or impede anybody's ability to express themselves as they deem appropriate; but, by the same token, as Justice Brandeis once said, you can't yell "fire" in a theater. And these regulations have been upheld, ths validity of them have been upheld, in your very case as a result of my decision in this instance.
And so having found you guilty, William Thomas and having considered all the relevant facts to which there is no dispute that are material to sentencing, it is the judgment of the court that you are hereby sentenced to the custody of the Attorney General of the United States or his authorized representative for a period of 60 days, and that you be required to pay a fine of $25. The defendant will stand committed.
Ms. Thomas, the court has considered the relevant facts and the material facts with respect to your case, the material at sentencing, and has determined that, largely for the same reasons that the court announced a moment ago with respect to your husband, that unsupervised probation and community service will not do any good insofar as you Personaliy are concerned; It may do some good insofar as
68
others are concerned to prevent them from violating the law, and so solely for the purposes of deterrence to others against violating the law, as the court has unfortunately been required to find that you have done in this caser will sentence you to the custody of the Attorney General of the United States or his authorized representative for a period of 50 days, and you will be required to pay a $25 special assessment to the United States Department of Justice.
Now, Mr. Semple, like the others, I have considered your case. You are a young man. You're old enough, however to know better than to violate the law, and regardless of your motivation, you do stand before the court this morning guilty of having violated the laws of the United States; and based on all the undisputed facts material to sentencing this morning, and the basis for its obligation as a deterrence to others against committing the same or similar offenses in the future that you be incarcerated, and, therefore, it is the judgment and sentence of the court that you be sentenced to the custody of the Attorney General of the United States or his authorized representative for a period of 50 days and fined $25 in the form of a special assessment, as required by Iaw.
Mr. Joseph, did you hear everything I just said to Mr. Semple?
MR. JOSEPH: Yes.
69
THE COURT: The court will articulate and send you to jail for the same period and for the same reasons as I just indicated, and, hopefully, it will be a deterrent to others if not to you.
That is the judgment and the sentence of the court. Mr. Hurley
MR. HURLEY: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: you are requested to be in Judge Rennedy's court.
MR. HURLEY: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you.
THE COURT: Very well. The court will take a short recess.
(RECESS)
THE COURT: Mr. Thomas, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Joseph, Mr. Semple, the court has a duty and I failed to perform it; namely, to advise each of you that you have ten days within which to note an appeal, if you object to the sentence imposed by the court this morning. I have to tell you that.
MR. THOMAS: Thank you.
THE COURT: And good luck to you all.
MR. THOMAS: Just for the record, could I make a motion to have the imposition of sentence stayed, pending the appeal?
THE COURT: Mr. Thomas, I anticipated that that might
70
be the case, and I've given it some thought, and as a result thereof, I'm going to deny it.
I will say this: The sentence of imprisonment which I have imposed on each of you this morning, as I said before, is not because I think the sentence will do any good to deter you from violating the park regulations in the futurer but hopefully it will be a deterrence to others against engaging in the same conduct.
And so, thereforer the request will be denied, because the court has carefully considered the facts with respect to each of your cases, and, as you know, has found you guilty, and has determined, based on all the material facts and the record herein, that you are guilty, and that all matters relating to sentencing based on that and those things, there is no question but what the sentence of incarceration is justified and called for under the laws, as I understand them. I have no choice.
Thank you.
MR. THOMAS: Thank you
A SPECTATOR: Well, it's not going to deter me, Your Honor. I'll be out there every single day before they get out. You just wait and see.
THE MARSHAL: Do you want me to bring her Back into the court, Your Honor?
THE COURT: No.
71
All right, call the next case, Mr. Clerk.
END OF TRANSCRIPT
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of ny stenographic notes.
_______________________________ Dec. 15, 1988
Frank J. Rangus, OCR
District of Columbia