IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 83-24:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
WILLIAM THOMAS AND CONCEPCION PICCIOTTO,
DEFENDANTS.
WASHINGTON, D. C.
DECEMBER 13, 1983
THE ABOVE-ENTITLED MATTER CAME ON FOR THE HEARING OF MOTIONS BEFORE THE HONORABLE LOUIS F. OBERDORFER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE, AT APPROXIMATELY 9:00 O'CLOCK A. M., PURSUANT TO ADJOURNMENT.
A P P E A R A N C E S
( THE SAME AS HERETOFORE NOTED. )
P R O C E E D I N GS
THE COURT: MR. THOMAS, YOU MAY RESUME THE STAND.
MR. GRABER: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE CONCLUDED MY DIRECT. BELIEVE MR. WOLL HAS A FEW QUESTIONS.
THE COURT: YES.
WHEREUPON,
WILLIAM THOMAS RSUMED THE STAND, AND, HAVING BEEN PREVIOUSLY DULY SWORN, WAS EXAMINED AND TESTIFIED FURTHER, AS FOLLOWS:
CROSS-EXAMINATION -- BY MR. WOLL:
Q. MR. THOMAS, YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING IN YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY ABOUT THE VIETNAM VETERANS DEMONSTRATION THAT YOU WITNESSED?
A. YES.
Q. AND l BELIEVE YOU INDICATED THIS WAS IN THE BEGINNING THE SUMMER OF 1983; IS THAT CORRECT?
A. YES. IT WAS EITHER IN THE BEGINNING OF THE SUMMER THE END OF THE SPRING THAT I WAS LAST DOWN THERE.
Q. NOW, DID YOU SAY THAT THIS WAS A CONTINUOUS THING THROUGH THE SUMMER?
A. YES, THEY ARE STILL THERE. I CAN ONLY TELL YOU WHAT I HAVE HEARD ABOUT IT, BETWEEN THEN AND NOW.
Q. ALL RIGHT. AND HOW RECENTLY HAVE YOU SEEN THEM THERE? YOU SAY THEY ARE STILL THERE RIGHT NOW?
A. YES. THEY ARE STILL THERE RIGHT NOW. THERE IS MAN WHO COMES BY EVERY MORNING AND TELLS ME ABOUT DISCUSSIONS WHAT HE HAD WITH THOSE PEOPLE DURING THE PREVIOUS NIGHT, A MAN BY THE NAME OF MR. OWENS.
Q. IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY THAT SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE SUMMER OF 1983, THAT THEY HAVE BEEN THERE CONTINUALLY, CAMPING?
A. THEY HAVE BEEN THERE SINCE THE -- SINCE NOVEMBER OR OCTOBER OF 1982.
Q. WHEN YOU SAY "BEEN THERE," WHAT DO YOU MEAN?
A. THEY ARE HOLDING A VIGIL FOR POW'S AND MIA'S. THEY ALSO HAD A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE THAT THEY WERE -- AND THERE IS QUITE A SIZABLE GROUP OF THEM, AND SOME OF THEM WOULD SLEEP NAD USE THE RECREATIONAL VEHICLE FOR LIVING ACCOMMODATIONS, ADDITION TO THE TENTS AND THINGS THAT THEY HAD SET UP. IT WAS REPORTED IN THE NEWSPAPER THAT THE RECREATIONAL VEHICLE WAS STOLEN LAST WEEK.
Q. OKAY. WERE IS THIS ACTIVITY GOING ON, WHAT LOCATION?
A. AT THE VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL. IT IS IN THE AREA OF 23RD STREET AND CONSTITUTION, I BELIEVE, 23RD STREET AND INDEPENDENCE.
Q. AND DURING THIS WHOLE PERIOD OF TIME, OR DURING THIS PERIOD OF TIME THAT THEY HAVE BEEN THERE, HAVE YOU SEEN THEM ACTUALLY CAMPING OVERNIGHT THERE AT THAT LOCATION?
A. WELL, I HAVE NOT, ACTUALLY. WHAT I TESTIFIED WAS THAT I HAVE NOT ACTUALLY SEEN THEM SLEEPING, BUT THAT I HAVE SEEN ALL OF THE OTHER INDICIA OF CAMPING, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SLEEPING. I HAVE SEEN FOOD-PREPARATION MATERIALS. I HAVE SEEN GROUND BROKEN. I HAVE SEEN SHELTERS. I HAVE SEEN PROPERTY STORED, AND I HAVE SEEN FIRE-MAKING-TYPE EQUIPMENT THERE, ALTHOUGH I NEVER SAW THE FIRES BEING MADE.
I HAVE HEARD FROM NUMEROUS DIFFERENT SOURCES -- AND I THINK THERE WAS TESTIMONY IN ONE OF THE CCNV HEARINGS -- THAT HEY ARE, IN FACT, SLEEPING THERE, AND THAT THEY HAVE A MOCK FIRE BASE.
THEIR SLEEPING WAS HELD TO BE SYMBOLIC, BECAUSE IT HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE WAY THINGS WERE CONDUCTED AT A FIRE BASE IN VIETNAM, WHERE SOMEBODY WOULD SLEEP, AND THEN SOMEBODY ELSE WOULD COME AND WAKE HIM UP. THEY WOULD CHANGE THE WATCH, AND THEN THE ONE WHO HAD AWAKENED HIM WOULD GO TO SLEEP.
Q. NOW, WITH WHAT FREQUENCY HAVE YOU SEEN THIS ACTIVITY?
MR. SHMANDA: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES THE WITNESS HAS TO SAY THAT HE HAS NOT SEEN IT. HE IS TESTIFYING ON THE BASIS OF WHAT --
THE COURT: I THOUGHT HE SAID HE HAD SEEN THE CAMPING EQUIPMENT. HE HAS NOT SEEN THEM SLEEP.
MR. WOLL: THAT IS WHAT I MEANT. I CAN REPHRASE E QUESTION.
MR. SHMANDA: ALL RIGHT. IF HE COULD REPHRASE THE QUESTION --
THE COURT: I UNDERSTOOD THAT. I UNDERSTAND HE HAS NOT SEEN ANYBODY SLEEP.
BY MR. WOLL:
Q. WITH WHAT FREQUENCY HAVE YOU SEEN THIS CAMPING ACTIVITY?
THE COURT: CAMPING -- THE
WITNESS: ACTUALLY, I HAVE ONLY BEEN THERE ONCE.
THE COURT: (CONTINUING) -- EQUIPMENT?
BY MR. WOLL:
Q. CAMPING EQUIPMENT?
A. I SPENT A FEW HOURS THERE ONCE, TAKING PICTURES. I WAS ONLY ON THAT ONE OCCASION THAT I WAS ACTUALLY THERE AND SAW IT.
Q. ALL RIGHT. NOW, YOU MENTIONED THAT DOZENS OF TIMES YOU HAVE SEEN PEOPLE SLEEPING IN THE VICINITY OF LAFAYETTE ARK; IS THAT CORRECT?
A. IF I SAID DOZENS, IT MAY HAVE BEEN SCORES OF TIMES.
Q. AND WITH WHAT FREQUENCY HAVE YOU SEEN THIS?
A. ON A DAILY BASIS.
Q. AND THIS IS AT NIGHT?
A. DURING THE DAY, DURING THE NIGHT, ANY HOURS OF THE DAY.
Q. HAVE YOU EVER SEEN ANY OF THESE PEOPLE ARRESTED FOR SLEEPING?
A. NO.
Q. NOW, DURING THE SAME PERIOD OF TIME THAT YOU HAVE SEEN THIS AND THESE PEOPLE HAVE NOT BEEN ARRESTED, HAVE YOU BEEN HASSLED IN ANY WAY BY THE POLICE CONCERNING SLEEPING, MR. THOMAS?
A. YES. ON VERY NEARLY A DAILY BASIS A POLICE OFFICER WILL KICK ME IN THE FEET AND ASK ME IF I AM AWAKE. PERSONALLY, I DON'T CONSIDER THAT TO BE ANY KIND OF PHYSICAL ABUSE, BUT IT IS VERY ABUSIVE, I THINK, BECAUSE IT IS LIKE SLEEP DEPRIVATION. BUT WHEN THEY KICK ME IN THE FEET, THAT IS -- I DON'T THINK HAT THEY ARE DOING IT TO TRY TO INFLICT ANY HARM ON ME. IT IS JUST THAT THEY -- BUT THEY DO IT ALL THE TIME. THEY -- WHICH I DON'T SEE THEM DOING TO OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE SLEEPING IN THE PARK, WITH ANY CONSISTENCY.
OCCASIONALLY, ONE POLICE OFFICER MIGHT TAKE IT UPON HIMSELF TO GO AROUND AND ROUSE EVERYBODY WHO IS SLEEPING IN THE PARK. BUT, AS A RULE, THE POLICE OFFICERS WILL IGNORE IT. I THINK I TESTIFIED YESTERDAY THAT ON SOME OCCASIONS THAT I HAD ACTUALLY ASKED POLICE OFFICERS JUST TO SEE WHAT THEIR REACTION WOULD BE. I HAD DRAWN THEIR ATTENTION TO PEOPLE WHO WERE SLEEPING.
MR. SHMANDA: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. IT WAS A SIMPLE QUESTION, CALLING FOR A SIMPLE ANSWER.
THE COURT: YES. JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION, MR. THOMAS.
THE WITNESS: OKAY. SORRY.
BY MR. WOLL:
Q. NOW, IN REFERENCE TO MISS PICCIOTTO YOU INDICATED IN YOUR TESTIMONY THAT AT SOME POINT YOU DECIDED TO PUT YOUR SIGNS TOGETHER? I THINK THAT WAS THE PHRASE THAT YOU USED.
A. WELL, I THINK IT WAS LARGELY A MATTER OF CIRCUMSTANCE.
MR. SHMANDA: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. THAT CAN BE ANSWERED "YES" OR "NO."
THE COURT: PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTION, MR. THOMAS. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT
REALLY WAS A QUESTION. THAT WAS A RHETORICAL STATEMENT BY COUNSEL.
MR. WOLL: I CAN ASK ANOTHER QUESTION.
THE COURT: WHY DON'T YOU JUST ASK A QUESTION.
MR. WOLL: YES, YOUR HONOR.
BY MR. WOLL:
Q. WHEN DID YOU AND MISS PICCIOTTO PUT YOUR SIGNS TOGETHER, SO TO SPEAK?
A. IT WAS AFTER OUR ARREST FOR CAMPING ON JUNE 17TH OF 1982.
Q. ALL RIGHT. NOW, HAS THERE BEEN ANY CONNECTION BETWEEN THE ACTIVITIES OF YOU TWO?
A. WELL, CONCEPCION, SINCE THAT PERIOD, HAS BECOME MORE CONCERNED WITH FOCUSING ON THE MATTER OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS, AND WE HAVE -- BECAUSE WE ARE ALWAYS, IT SEEMS, IN THE SAME CONFRONTATIONAL SITUATION WITH THE LAW-ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING TOGETHER.
SHE HELPS ME A LOT WITH DIFFERENT THINGS, AND I TRY TO HELP HER.
Q. COULD YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC AS TO HOW SHE HELPS YOU AND HOW YOU HELP HER?
A. WELL, IF IT WEREN'T FOR HER, I PROBABLY WOULD NOT HAVE ANYTHING EXCEPT A PAIR OF BLUE JEANS, AND I WOULD STILL BE EATING OUT OF TRASH CANS. SHE ACQUIRES MY CLOTHING. SHE DOES MY LAUNDRY, AND SHE PREPARES MY FOOD FOR ME.
Q. ALL RIGHT. NOW, IN REFERENCE TO THE ACTIVITIES THE POLICE HAVE DIRECTED AGAINST YOU, HAVE THERE BEEN CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THESE WERE ALSO DIRECTED AT MISS PICCIOTTO?
A. OH, YES. BEFORE WE WERE EVEN TOGETHER, THE POLICE USED TO --
THE COURT: NOW, YOU HAVE ANSWERED THE QUESTION.
BY MR. WOLL:
Q. COULD YOU DESCRIBE, SINCE YOU HAVE BEEN TOGETHER, WHAT ACTIVITY HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST YOU WHEN SHE WAS PRESENT AND SHE WAS ALSO SUBJECT TO SUCH HARASSMENT?
A. KICKING IN THE FEET AND SHINING LIGHTS IN THE FACE. SOMETIMES THE POLICE WILL COME IN THE EARLY MORNING HOURS AND LINE TWO, THREE -- AT THE MOST, THEY HAVE HAD, I THINK, FIVE POLICE CARS PARKED DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF OUR SIGNS, BETWEEN HOURS OF 2:00 AND 4:00 IN THE MORNING. AND THEY SHINE THEIR SEARCHLIGHTS FROM THE CARS IN OUR FACES OR GET OUT OF CARS AND TAP US ON THE FEET AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
Q. HAS THIS CONTINUED UP UNTIL THE PRESENT?
A. OH, THE LAST TIME THAT IT HAPPENED WHERE THEY PARKED THE CARS WAS ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO, I THINK. BUT WE HAVE BEEN -- THE LAST TIME ANYBODY KICKED ME IN THE FEET WAS LAST FRIDAY, I GUESS.
Q. ALL RIGHT.
THE COURT: WHEN?
THE WITNESS: LAST FRIDAY, IT WAS OFFICER CURTIS.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. WOLL: I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
THE COURT: CROSS-EXAMINATION.
MR. SHMANDA: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
CROSS-EXAMINATION -- BY MR. SHMANDA:
Q. MR. THOMAS, DO YOU AFFIRM, OR DISAGREE WITH, THE OFFICERS' TESTIMONY THAT WHEN THEY APPROACHED YOU, YOUR EYES WERE SHUT, AND YOU WERE IN A PRONE POSITION ON THE SIDEWALK ADJACENT TO LAFAYETTE PARK ON THE MORNING WE ARE TALKING ABOUT?
A. DO I HAVE TO ANSWER "YES" OR "NO" TO THAT?
Q. YES.
A. I DISAGREE?
Q. YOU DISAGREE?
A. YES.
Q. HOW DO YOU DISAGREE?
A. I DISAGREE WITH REGARD TO THE ALLEGATION THAT I WAS IN A PRONE POSITION.
Q. YOU WERE NOT IN THE PRONE POSITION?
A. I WAS NOT IN A PRONE POSITION.
Q. IN WHAT POSITION WERE YOU, SIR?
A. I WAS IN THE SITTING POSITION.
Q. AND HOW WERE YOU ABLE TO BE SEATED ON THE SIDEWALK?
A. I --
THE COURT: HOW WAS HE SEATED ON THE SIDEWALK?
MR. SHMANDA: I AM SORRY, YES. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE WITNESS: I WAS SEATED ON THE SIDEWALK, WITH MY BACK AGAINST THE SUPPORT TO ONE OF THE SIGNS, A TWO-BY-FOUR SUPPORT OF ONE OF THE SIGNS.
BY MR. SHMANDA:
Q. ALL RIGHT.
A. SO I WAS LEANING AGAINST THE SUPPORT OF ONE OF THE SIGNS.
Q. THE BOTTOM PART OF YOUR BODY WAS ON THE SIDEWALK, BUT YOUR BACK PART WAS ELEVATED?
A. YES. MY LEGS WERE EXTENDED ON THE SIDEWALK.
Q- AND SO IF THE OFFICER TESTIFIED HE OBSERVED YOU IN A PRONE POSITION, HE IS MISTAKEN?
A. I THINK THAT HE TESTIFIED THAT WE MAY HAVE BEEN SORT OF SITTING UP, BUT HE DIDN'T RECALL.
Q. AND YOUR COMPANION, MISS PICCIOTTO, WHAT WAS HER POSITION, AS YOU RECALL, THAT NIGHT?
A. AS I RECALL IT, SHE WAS PROPPED UP AGAINST THE CURB, WHICH THE OFFICER MENTIONED, THAT IS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SIDEWALK THERE. IT IS A RAISED, ELEVATED -- AN ELEVATED CURB THAT IS RAISED ABOUT, I WOULD IMAGINE, EIGHT OR NINE INCHESCHES ABOVE THE SIDEWALK AND BORDERING THE GRASS OF THE PARK.
Q. ALL RIGHT, SIR. DO YOU AGREE, OR NOT AGREE, WITH THE OFFICER'S TESTIMONY, IF HE SO TESTIFIED, THAT THE OBSERVED YOUR EYES CLOSED?
A. IT IS QUITE POSSIBLE THAT HE OBSERVED MY EYES CLOSED.
Q. IT IS POSSIBLE BECAUSE, IN FACT, YOU WERE SLEEPING, WERE YOU NOT, AT SIX O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING ON SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 1983?
A. I HAVE SOME DIFFICULTY WITH THAT QUESTION.
Q. TRY TO GIVE IT YOUR BEST SHOT: ''YES" OR "NO"?
A. CAN I ASK YOU WHAT YOU MEAN BY "SLEEPING"?
Q. DO YOU KNOW WHAT "SLEEPING" IS, MR. THOMAS?
A. I HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORD. I AM WONDERING IF OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THE SAME.
Q. WELL, LET'S USE THE COMMONLY ACCEPTED ONE THAT WE ALL LEARN THROUGH EXPERIENCE, AND I ASK YOU AGAIN: YOU WERE SLEEPING, WERE YOU NOT, WHEN THE OFFICER CAME UPON YOU?
A. I MAY HAVE BEEN CASUALLY SLEEPING.
Q. AND WHAT IS "CASUALLY SLEEPING," AS OPPOSED TO WHAT?
A. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE TERM "CASUAL SLEEP," WHICH OCCURS IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER, UNDER THESE REGULATIONS, 50.27, IS PERMITTED, CASUAL SLEEPING. I WOULD UNDERSTAND CASUAL SLEEPING TO BE WHERE YOU SLEEP FOR, OH, PERHAPS A PERIOD OF SEVERAL HOURS. PERSONALLY, I, MYSELF, AM THE TYPE OF PERSON WHO NEEDS EIGHT HOURS OF SLEEP A DAY TO FUNCTION WELL, WHERE I AM NOT FALLING ASLEEP DURING THE DAY.
Q. SO YOUR ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IS: YOU WERE --
A. A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, AND WITHOUT BEDDING MATERIALS, I WOULD SAY WOULD BE CASUAL SLEEPING. AND THAT IS WHAT I SUPPOSE I WAS DOING AT THAT TIME, SLEEPING CASUALLY.
Q. YOU DID NOT HAVE ANY BEDDING MATERIALS?
A. NO, I DID NOT HAVE ANY BEDDING MATERIALS.
Q. DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING WRAPPED AROUND YOU AT THE TIME?
A. I WAS WEARING A JACKET.
Q. OTHER THAN CLOTHING, I MEAN, MR. THOMAS, DlD YOU HAVE A BLANKET OR ANY--
A. NO. OTHER THAN CLOTHING, I DID NOT HAVE ANYTHING WRAPPED AROUND ME.
Q. I WILL TELL YOU WHAT, MR. THOMAS: IF YOU WILL LET ME FINISH MY QUESTION, AND THEN YOU CAN GIVE YOUR ANSWER?
A. EXCUSE ME.
Q. MR. THOMAS
MR. SHMANDA: CAN WE HAVE GOVERNMENT'S EXHIBIT NO. 2?
BY MR. SHMANDA:
Q. (CONTINUING) -- YOU WOULD AGREE, WOULD YOU NOT, THAT THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF YOUR AND MISS --
MR. SHMANDA: THIS IS NOT IT. IT IS AN INVENTORY.
I AM SORRY. THANK YOU.
BY MR. SHMANDA:
Q. YOU WOULD AGREE, WOULD YOU NOT, THAT THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF YOUR AND MISS PICCIOTTO'S PERSONAL BELONGINGS IN AND AROUND THE AREA WHERE YOU WERE ON THE MORNING OF SEPTEMEBR 24, 1983?
A. NO.
Q. YOU WOULD NOT AGREE?
A. I WOULD NOT AGREE.
Q. ALL RIGHT. MR. THOMAS, I HAVE GOVERNMENT'S EXHIBIT NO.2 HERE, AND LET ME READ TO YOU THE ARTICLES CONTAINED ON THERE. ALL RIGHT.
MR. GRABER: YOUR HONOR, I THINK THE DOCUMENT SPEAKS FOR ITSELF, AND THE QUESTION THAT WAS PUT TO HIM WAS PROPERTY BELONGING TO MR. THOMAS AND MISS PICCIOTTO. I THINK THE WHOLE PROBLEM HERE IS THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. IT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN THE RECORD, THAT IS, WHO SPECIFICALLY OWNED WHAT PROPERTY.
THE COURT: I REALLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE OBJECTION, MR. GRABER.
MR. GRABER: WELL, THE FIRST OBJECTION IS: I DON'T THINK IT SEVES ANY PURPOSE TO READ FIVE PAGES OF PROPERTY, WHEN THE DOCUMENT SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. I THINK HE COULD SHOW THE WITNESS THE DOCUMENT AND ASK HIM WHICH PROPERTY, IF ANY, WERE HIS. THAT WOULD CERTAINLY BE LESS TIME-CONSUMING.
THE COURT: I AM NOT GOING TO INTERFERE WITH HIS METHOD OF CROSS-EXAMINATION AT THIS POINT. IF IT GETS TO BE PROLIX, I WILL CUT IT OFF.
MR. SHMANDA: YES, SIR.
BY MR. SHMANDA:
Q. MR. THOMAS, ACCORDING TO GOVERNMENT'S EXHIBIT NO. 2, WHICH IS NOW IN EVIDENCE, THERE WAS TAKEN FROM THE AREA WHERE YOU AND MISS PICCIOTTO WERE ARRESTED THAT MORNING THE FOLLOWING ARTICLES:
SUGAR IN A TIN CAN, A PLASTIC BAG CONTAINING CONDIMENTS. TWO THERMOSES, EIGHT BAGS OF PEANUTS, A CANTALOUP, THREE PEACHE SEVEN ONIONS, A POUND CAKE, TWO LOAVES OF FRENCH BREAD, TWO CHEESE-AND-TOMATO SANDWICHES ON RYE, TWO PASTRIES, PLASTIC FORKS AND KNIVES, THREE CANDLES, A BOTTLE OF OLIVE OIL, TWO PLASTIC CONTAINERS, AND A FRYING PAN.
NOW, WERE ANY OF THOSE YOURS, SIR?
A. NO.
Q. DO YOU KNOW WHOSE THEY WERE?
A. CONCEPCION GOT THEM ALL.
Q. THEY WERE CONCEPCION'S?
A. YES.
Q. AND WERE THEY USED FOR YOUR BENEFIT, SIR, IN ANY WAY?
A. YES. CONCEPCION FED ME WITH THE FOOD.
Q. HOW ABOUT, MR. THOMAS, A SAFETY RAZOR, A PONCHO, TWO UMBRELLAS, A BAG CONTAINING MISCELLANEOUS CLOTHING, A BROWN LEATHER BELT, A PAIR OF RUBBER BOOTS, A RED CANVAS BAG WITH WHEELS, A COSMETIC BAG, BROWN IN COLOR, TWO RAINCOATS, PAIR OF JEANS, THREE SWEATERS, AND A SHIRT; WERE ANY OF HOSE BELONGINGS YOURS?
A. WELL, SPECIFICALLY, I BELIEVE THAT I TRIED TO TESTIFY YESTERDAY --
Q. WERE ANY OF THE BELONGINGS I JUST READ TO YOU YOURS, R. THOMAS? TRY TO ANSWER MY QUESTION.
A. YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO LET ME PREFACE MY ANSWER.
Q. CAN YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION "YES" OR "NO"?
A. NO, NONE OF THOSE THINGS WERE MINE.
Q. FINE. A NEW ROLL OF DUCT TAPE, TWO EXTENSION CORDS, PAINT BRUSHES, RAGS, A RED SEATCUSHION, METAL STAKES, PLASTIC FACE MASKS, ONE ROLL OF FILM, CANVAS WALL PASTE -- POSTERS, A BIBLE, A 12-FOOT-BY-6-FOOT WOODEN, PAINTED SIGN, NYLON TARP, AND THREE BOXES OF BOOKS; WERE ANY OF THOSE OURS, MR. THOMAS?
A. NONE OF THOSE THINGS WERE MINE.
Q. WHOSE WERE THEY, IF YOU KNOW?
A. I DON'T REALLY THINK THEY WERE ANYBODY'S, BUT CONCEPCON PICKED MOST OF THEM UP.
Q. WERE ANY OF THEM USED BY YOU PRIOR TO YOUR ARREST?
A. MANY OF THEM I USED THE PAINT BRUSHES, THE PAINT, THE BIBLE, SOME OF THE BOOKS.
Q. HOW ABOUT A BOX OF ASSORTED PAPERS AND ENVELOPES, A FIVE-GALLON METAL CONTAINER, A VIVITAR CAMERA, MODI L 845, WITH A TELEMOTOR, A METAL TRASHCAN, A BLUE-AND-YELLOW KITE, AN INDEX FILING SYSTEM, AND SELF-ADHESIVE ADDRESS LABELS, PAPERCLIPS; WERE ANY OF THOSE YOURS, SIR?
A. NO, NONE OF THOSE THINGS WERE MINE. NOW --
THE COURT: YOU HAVE ANSWERED THE QUESTION.
BY MR. SHMANDA:
Q. DO YOU KNOW WHOSE THEY WERE?
A. I KNOW THAT SOME OF THOSE THINGS WERE PICKED UP BY CONCEPCION. SOME OF THOSE THINGS, I USED.
Q. DID YOU USE SOME OF THOSE THINGS PRIOR TO YOUR ARREST THERE ON THE SCENE?
A. YES, I DID. THE CAMERA BELONGED TO WINNIE GALLANT.
Q . THAT IS MISS GALLANT'S CAMERA?
A. YES.
Q . ALL RIGHT.
A. THAT WAS THERE TO TAKE PICTURES.
Q. HOW ABOUT TWO 2-BY-6 PLYWOOD BOARDS, TWO MORE 2-BY-6 PLYWOOD BOARDS, 5-FOOT-BY-4-FOOT PLYWOOD BOARD, MISSELLANEOUS PIECES OF LUMBER, MOLDING, AND ASSORTED PIECES -- TEN 2-FOOT-BY-4-FOOT PIECES OF WOOD, ONE SIGN, EUROPEANS CRY," ONE LIFE RING SIGN, "SAVE YOURSELF," ONE BOX CONTAINING NUMEROUS CANS OF PAINT, ELECTRICAL WIRING, THREE THERMOS JUGS, A T-SHAPED PIECE OF METAL, AND ONE 8-FOOT-BY-3-FOOT BULLETIN BOARD; DID ANY OF OSE THINGS BELONG YOU?
A. NONE OF THOSE THINGS BELONGED TO ME. SOME OF THOSE THINGS I DID PICK UP, MYSELF. I WOULD IMAGINE -- I CAN'T MEMBER EXACTLY WHICH, BUT I WOULD IMAGINE THAT I PICKED UP SOME OF THE LUMBER THAT IS TALKED ABOUT, PROBABLY SOME THE PLYWOOD, AND POSSIBLY A CAN OR TWO OF THE PAINT.
THOSE THINGS WERE ALL USED TO MAKE SIGNS, AND A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU MENTIONED THERE WERE SIGNS.
Q. I UNDERSTAND.
WHERE WERE THEY STORED WHEN THEY WERE NOT BEING USED TO MAKE SIGNS: THE WOOD, THE PIECES OF PLYWOOD, THE PAINT, HE BRUSHES? WHERE WERE THEY KEPT, MR. THOMAS?
A. WHERE WERE THEY KEPT?
Q. YES.
A. IT IS LIKE IF I AM WORKING IN A SHOP AND I PUT DOWN HAMMER TO USE A SAW. I THINK THAT IS THE KIND OF STORAGE THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. I WAS MAKING SIGNS WHENEVER I HAD TIME, AND WHEN I DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO MAKE SIGNS, I WOULD SET DOWN, OR, IF YOU PREFER, STORE, THE THINGS BEHIND ONE OF THE OTHER SIGNS.
Q. WELL, AT 6:00 O'CLOCK ON SATURDAY MORNING, SEPTEMBER 4TH, YOU WERE NOT
USING ANY OF THOSE ITEMS --
A. THEY WERE SITTING --
Q. (CONTINUING) -- WERE YOU, MR. THOMAS?
A. NO. NO, I WASN'T.
Q. THEY WERE STORED IN AND AROUND YOU?
A. WELL, IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT THAT.
Q. WELL, WERE THEY, OR WERE THEY NOT?
A. WELL, I WOULD SAY THEY WERE PLACED THERE WHILE I WAS NOT USING THEM. YOU MIGHT CALL THAT STORAGE.
Q. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT THERE WERE A LARGE UMBER OF TANGIBLE THINGS OF THE KIND THAT I HAVE JUST READ TO YOU -- AND I HAVE NOT BY ANY MEANS READ ALL OF THE ITEMS LISTED ON GOVERNMENT'S EXHIBIT NO. 2 -- THAT WERE IN AND AROUND HERE YOU AND MISS PICCIOTTO WERE OBSERVED BY THE POLICE THAT MORNING; CORRECT?
A. THAT'S TRUE, BUT I HAVE NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT IS OR WHAT IS NOT IN THAT AREA. IF SOMEONE WANTS TO COME ALONG AD LEAVE SOMETHING THERE, I HAVE NO RIGHT OR DUTY TO TELL THEM TO MOVE IT AWAY.
Q. WELL, WHO CAME AND LEFT THESE THINGS, SUCH AS THE SIGN-MAKING MATERIALS, THE PAINT, THE TOOLS, THE WOOD?
A. TOOLS?
Q. WHO CAME AND LEFT THOSE, MR. THOMAS?
A. WERE THERE ALSO TOOLS THERE?
Q. WHEN I SAY "TOOLS," I MEAN THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT LIKE TAPE AND OTHER ITEMS: THE KNIFE I TOLD YOU ABOUT, THE SIGN MATERIALS, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.
A. WELL, I TESTIFIED THAT I WAS RESPONSIBLE- FOR BRINGING AT LEAST SOME OF THE SIGN MATERIALS HlERE, AND I CAN'T SPECIFICALLY RECALL, BUT I WOULD ASSUME THAT I WAS ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR SOME OF THE PAINT AND POSSIBLY SOME OF THE BRUSHES,
WHICH WOULD BE TOOLS.
ASIDE FROM THAT, I DON'T FEEL THAT I CAN REALLY TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WERE THERE.
Q. ELECTRICAL WIRING, YOU DID NOT BRING THAT?
A. IT IS CONCEIVABLE THAT I DID. I CAN'T REMEMBER. BUT I DO USE ELECTRICAL WIRING FOR TYING THE SIGNS DOWN.
Q. THE NUMEROUS --
A. THE SIGNS THAT I HAVE NOW ARE TIED DOWN BY ELECTRICAL WIRING.
Q . SO YOU MAY HAVE BROUGHT THAT?
A. IT IS CONCEIVABLE.
Q. THE T-SHAPED PIECE OF METAL?
A. I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT -- I DON'T RECALL A T-SHAPED PIECE OF METAL AT ALL. I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT I WOULD HAVE USED IT FOR, AND SO I CAN'T IMAGINE WHY I WOULD HAVE BROUGHT IT THERE. I THINK I CAN SAFELY SAY THAT I WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE
FOR BRINGING THAT, EVEN THOUGH I CAN'T RECALL IT.
Q. THE METAL TRASH CONTAINER?
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME. MR. SHMANDA. ARE YOU TRYING THE CASE NOW, OR ARE YOU DEALING WITH THE SELECTIVE-PROSECUTION MOTION?
MR. SHMANDA: NO, YOUR HONOR. THIS WITNESS HAS TESTIFIED FOR ALMOST AN HOUR, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND THAT. I AM TALKING ABOUT THIS LINE OF QUESTIONING.
THE WITNESS: NO, I WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE TRASHCAN. EXCUSE ME.
THE COURT: YOU DON'T INTERRUPT ME.
THE WITNESS: I AM SORRY.
MR. SHMANDA: I AM SORRY, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: DO YOU NEED TO PURSUE THIS LINE OF QUESTIONING FOR THE PURPOSE OF OPPOSING THESE MOTIONS?
MR. SHMANDA: WELL, YOUR HONOR, ON ONE OF THE --
THE COURT: WHY? GIVE ME A PROFFER.
MR. SHMANDA: HE INDICATES THAT HE WAS NOT ENGAGED IN CAMPING.
THE COURT: THAT IS WHAT HE IS GOING TO BE TRIED ABOUT, IF HE IS TRIED.
MR. SHMANDA: RIGHT.
THE COURT: I DON'T HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER HE WAS CAMPING IN ORDER TO DECIDE THESE MOTIONS.
MR. SHMANDA: WELL, HE HAS MOVED TO DISMISS ON THE GROUNDS THAT WE ARE UNCONSTITUTIONALLY CHARGING HIM, YOUR HONOR, AND ONE OF THE WAYS I THOUGHT THE GOVERNMENT COULD HOW THAT --
THE COURT: WELL, WHAT YOU ARE PROFFERING HERE IS THAT HE HAS BEEN STORING PERSONAL BELONGINGS AND HAS USED 2 THIS AREA AS A LIVING ACCOMMODATION?
MR. SHMANDA: THAT IS CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT.
THE COURT: NOW, WHAT DOES THE SLEEPING HAVE TO DO WITH THAT?
MR. SHMANDA: PARDON ME?
THE COURT: ISN'T THAT YOUR CASE?
MR. SHMANDA: WELL, YOUR HONOR, CAMPING IS DEFINED AS BOTH.
THE COURT: WELL --
MR. SHMANDA: IT IS DEFINED AS THE USE OF PARK LAND FOR L]VING-ACCOMMODATION PURPOSES SUCH AS SLEEPING ACTIVITIES --
THE COURT: OR STORING PERSONAL BELONGINGS.
MR. SHMANDA: RIGHT. EXACTLY.
THE COURT: AND YOU HAVE ESTABLISHED, YOU THINK, OR YOU HAVE ALLEGED AND HAVE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE ALLEGATION, THAT THIS IS CAMPING, BECAUSE THERE IS EVIDENCE OF HIS STORING PERSONAL BELONGINGS.
MR. SHMANDA: THAT IS CORRECT, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: WHY DO YOU NEED MORE? I DON'T HAVE TO TRY THE CASE.
MR. SHMANDA: YES, SIR. I WILL MOVE ON.
THE COURT: VERY WELL.
MR. SHMANDA: I WILL MOVE ON TO ANOTHER AREA, YOUR OHNOR.
THE COURT: GO AHEAD.
BY MR. SHMANDA:
Q. NOW, MR. THOMAS -- BY THE WAY, HAD YOU BEEN DRINKIN
THAT MORNING BEFORE THE POLICE CAME, MR. THOMAS?
A. NO, I WAS -- I HAD A COUPLE OF DRINKS THE NIGHT
BEFORE, ACTUALLY.
Q. THAT IS WHAT I MEAN: IN OTHER WORDS, THE EVENING BEFORE?
A. YES.
Q. SO YOU DO AGREE, OR DISAGREE, WITH OFFICER HAYNES THAT HE DETECTED ALCOHOL ON YOUR BREATH WHEN HE CAME UP TO YOU?
A. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT HE DID.
Q. NOW, MR. THOMAS, I WOULD LIKE, IF I COULD, PLEASE, TO SHIFT TO AN ALLEGATION, A MORE SERIOUS ALLEGATION YOU HAVE MADE, CONCERNING THE CONDUCT OF OFFICER SHERBA.
A. FINE.
Q. YOU RECALL, YOU TESTIFIED YESTERDAY HE KICKED YOU IN THE SIDE OF YOUR BODY, IN THE FEET, IN THE HEAD AREA. YOU DID SAY THOSE THINGS YESTERDAY?
A. YES, I DID.
Q. NOW, I TAKE IT THAT YOU FILED A COMPLAINT ON THIS ATTER AS SOON AS YOU COULD?
A. I DIDN'T FILE A COMPLAINT AT ALL.
Q. YOU DID?
A. I DID NOT.
Q. I TAKE IT THAT YOU NOTIFIED YOU THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY YOU COULD, THAT SOME . . . HAD OCCURRED TO YOU AND ASKED HIM TO TAKE SOME . . . BEHALF?
A. I DID NOTIFY AN ATTORNEY, BUT I DID NOT . . . ANY ACTION BE TAKEN ON MY BEHALF.
Q. NOW, MR. THOMAS, YOU ARE A KNOWLEDGEABLE INDIV. . . WHEN IT COMES TO YOUR RIGHTS, AND IN ASSERTING YOUR RIGHTS; . . . ARE YOU NOT? WOULD YOU SAY THAT?
A. I WOULD SAY THAT, PERHAPS, RELATIVELY SPEAKING. I AM.
Q. YES. NOW, WHY IS IT, SIR, THAT IF SOMEBODY KICKED YOU IN THE HEAD --
THE COURT: WELL, IT DOES NOT MATTER WHY. THE FACT IS HE DIDN'T MAKE A COMPLAINT. THAT IS ALL YOU WANT TO ESTABLISH.
MR. SHMANDA: MAY I ASK HIM AS TO THE SPECIFIC REASON WHY, YOUR HONOR, JUST SO WE ARE CLEAR ON THAT? I AM NOT CLEAR ON THAT.
THE COURT: I DON'T KNOW WHAT DIFFERENCE THE REASON MAKES.
MR. SHMANDA: WELL, YOUR HONOR, IT IS A MOST SERIOUS ALLEGATION.
THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND THAT, AND HE DIDN'T MAKE COMPLAINT. WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT? YOU ARE HERE ON A MOTION TO DISMISS. HE DIDN'T MAKE A COMPLAINT ABOUT WHAT HE CHARGED.
MR. SHMANDA: BUT HE IS TO TESTIFYING IN FRONT OF YOU, YOUR H()NOR.
THE COURT: THAT IS RIGHT.
MR. SHMANDA: AND I THINK THAT THAT BASICALLY PUTS THE GOVERNMENT IN SOMEWHAT OF AN UNFAIR POSITION, WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO PROBE --
MR. GRABER YOUR HONOR, THE ANSWER WILT TAKE LESS THAN A MINUTE, AND WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO HIS ANSWERING THE QUESTION.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD.
THE WITNESS: WELL, I AM AFRAID THAT THE REASON THAT I MADE NO COMPLAINT IS BECAUSE I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO CONFIDENCE IN THS JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND DON'T WISH TO GIVE THE SYSTEM ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR EXISTING BY AVAILING MYSELF OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO USE IT IN RETALIATION AGAINST THE POLICE FORCES. I FEEL THERE HAVE BEEN MANY OCCASIONS ON WHICH I COULD HAVE LODGED COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE POLICE, BUT HAVE ALWAYS REFRAINED FROM DOING SO, AND HAVE NO INTENTION OF DOING SO.
I THAT IS WHY I AM NOT A PARTY TO THE CASE THAT IS GOING ON UPSTAIRS.
BY MR. SHMAN DA:
Q. MR. THOMAS, PRIOR TO YOUR ARREST ON SEPTEMBER 24,1983, HAD YOU EVER BEEN ARRESTED BY OFFICER HAYNES, PRIOR TO THAT DAY?
A. PRIOR TO MY ARREST OF DECEMBER 24TH? (SIC)
Q. YES, THE ONE THAT BRINGS US TO COURT. IN OTHER WORDS, HAD YOU AND HE HAD PRIOR CONTACT IN AN ARREST SCENARIO?
A. I CAN'T SAY FOR SURE, BECAUSE, FREQUENTLY, WHEN I HAVE BEEN ARRESTED, THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF OFFICERS PRESENT, AND I HAVE NOT BEEN AWARE OF WHO WAS ACTUALLY DOING THE ARRESTING.
THEN, WHEN THE CASES WERE SUBSEQUENTLY NO-PAPERED, I HAD NO OPPORTUNITY TO FACE THE ARRESTING OFFICERIN COURT. AND SO I WENT AWAY, NOT KNOWING EXACTLY WHO I HAD BEEN ARRESTED BY. SO IT IS POSSIBLE THAT HE HAD ARRESTED ME ON ANOTHER OCCASION, BUT THIS IS THE FIRST ONE I CAN RECALL.
Q. THE SAME QUESTION WITH RESPECT TO SERGEANT MALHOYT: PRIOR TO THE INCIDENT ON SEPTEMBER 24TH, HAD THERE BEEN AN ARREST CONTACT INVOLVING YOU AND SERGEANT MALHOYT?
A. AGAIN, SERGEANTS DON'T, AS A RULE, MAKE ARRESTS.
THE COURT: THE QUESTION IS WHETHER HE ARRESTED YOU.
THE WITNESS: I DON'T KNOW.
BY MR. SHMANDA:
Q.. OKAY. NOW, MR. THOMAS, YOU INDICATED, I BELIEVE, IN YOUR DIRECT EXAMINATION, THAT YOU HAVE MADE VERY MANY ATTEMPTS TO CONFORM YOUR CONDUCT IN LAFAYETTE PARK TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAW, BUT YOU HAVE HAD GREAT DIFFICULTY DOING THAT. DID YOU MAKE A STATEMENT SIMILAR TO THAT IN YOUR DIRECT
EXAMINATION YESTERDAY? I
A. YES.
Q. IS THERE ANY SPECIAL REASON, MR. THOMAS, WHY YOU CANNOT CONFORM YOUR CONDUCT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAW?
A. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE LAW.
Q. YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE LAW?
A. IT SEEMS VAGUE, AND I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT IS PERMITTED, AND WHAT IS NOT PERMITTED.
Q. YOU DO KNOW ALMOST VERBATIM, DO YOU NOT, MR. THOMAS, THE TEXT OF WHAT WE WOULD CALL THE CAMPING REGULATION?
A. YES, I DO.
Q. AND SO IS IT A QUESTION OF NOT UNDERSTANDING THE TERMS IN THE REGULATION, OR IS IT SOMETHING ELSE?
A. WELL, THE LAST SENTENCE, AS I RECALL IT, SAYS: THE ABOVE-LISTED ACTIVITIES CONSTITUTE CAMPING WHEN IT REASONABLY APPEARS, IN LIGHT OF ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THAT WHAT THE PARTICIPANTS ARE DOING IS USING THE AREA AS A LIVING-ACCOMMODAT PURPOSE, REGARDLESS OF ANY OTHER ACTIVITIES IN WHICH THEY MAY BE ENGAGING.
NOW, ''THE ABOVE-LISTED ACTIVITIES" ARE SEVEN. AT MY I INITIAL HEARING IN FRONT OF MAGISTRATE BURNETT ON THIS CHARGE, DEPUTY CHIEF LINDSEY TESTIFIED, OR ATTEMPT TO TESTIFY, AS TO PRECISELY, IN HIS OPINION, WHAT CONSTITUTED CAMPING. HE SAID THAT IT WAS NOT ONE OF "THE ABOVE-LISTED ACTIVITIES." HE SAID THAT IT HAD TO BE AT LEAST TWO OR MORE OF "THE ABOVE-LISTED ACTIVITIES."
AND, YET, HE WAS UNABLE TO DEFINE PRECISELY WHICH TWO OR MORE OF A COMBINATION OF "THE ABOVE-LISTED ACTIVITIES" WOULD CONSTITUTE CAMPING.
AND, AS I SAID YESTERDAY, MY PURPOSE IS TO TRY TO lLLUSTRATE THAT ONE CAN LIVE WITHOUT ACCOMMODATIONS. THIS IS THE CRUX, I THINK, OF MY MISUNDERSTANDING. THERE IS NO DEFINITION OF "LIVING ACCOMMODATIONS" IN ANY DICTIONARY THAT I HAVE SEEN. "LIVING" IS THE CONDITION OR STATE OF BEING ALIVE, CLEARLY DEFINED IN EVERY DICTIONARY.
I CANNOT DENY THAT I AM LIVING A LARGE PART OF MY LIFE IN LAFAYETTE PARK, JUST AS I AM LIVING IN THIS COURTROOM NOW. BUT THE POINT IS THAT "ACCOMMODATIONS" IS DEFINED AS PLEASURES, CONVENIENCE, COMFORTS, AMENITIES WHICH MAKE LIFE MORE ENJOYABLE OR COMFORTABLE. AND THOSE, I THINK, I AM LIVING WITHOUT.
Q. YES, SIR. JUST A COUPLE OF MORE QUESTIONS, MR. THOMAS, AND I WILL BE FINISHED.
MAY I INQUIRE, MR. THOMAS, OF YOUR EDUCATIONAL LEVEL? I SHOULD HAVE ASKED THAT IN THE BEGINNING, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT CLEAR FOR THE RECORD.
I COULD YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOUR FORMAL EDUCATION?
A. I WENT THROUGH THE EIGHTH GRADE.
Q. EIGHTH GRADE. AND, MR. THOMAS, ONE THING THAT IS CONFUSING --
MR. SHMANDA: IF I COULD JUST SEE -- REFERRING, IF YOUR HONOR PLEASE, TO DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NO. 10, WHICH WAS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION.
BY MR. SHMANDA:
Q. MR. THOMAS, I BELIEVE DURING YOUR TESTIMONY YESTERDAY YOU INDICATED THAT DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 10, WHICH WAS WRITTEN BY YOU SHORTlY AFTER ONE OF YOUR EARLIER ARRESTS, BASICALLY STATES YOUR OBJECTIVES; IS THAT CORRECT?
A. IS THAT DATED NOVEMBER 27, 1981?
Q. YES, SIR, 1981.
A. YES.
Q. YES, SIR. NOW, MR. THOMAS, YOU INDICATE IN YOUR WRITTEN STATEMENT THAT YOUR TRUE DESIRE IS TO LEAVE THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, IN DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NO. 10, AND THAT IS THE REASON WHY YOU ARE LIVING IN PROXIMITY TO THE WHITE
HOUSE. ISN'T THAT A FACT, SIR?
A. COULD YOU READ WHAT IT SAYS, PLEASE?
Q. I WILL BE HAPPY TO. I WILL NOT READ THE WHOLE THING.
A. READ THE PART YOU ARE REFERRING TO.
Q. YES. REFERRING TO THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF DEFENDANT' S EXHIBIT NO. 10, MR. THOMAS: "I AM PRESENTLY IN THE UNITED STATES AGAINST MY WILL, HAVING BEEN BROUGHT HERE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OF THIS COUNTRY. IMMEDIATELY, MY OWN DESIRE IS TO LEAVE THIS COUNTRY AND TO RESUME THE ACTIVITIES IN WHICH I WAS ENGAGED PRIOR TO THE ILLEGAL INTERFERENCE OF THE AUTHORITIES OF THIS COUNTRY."
ARE THOSE YOUR WORDS?
A. THOSE ARE MY WORDS, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT.
Q. IS YOUR OBJECTIVE IN YOUR VIGIL IN LAFAYETTE PARK --I AM ASKING YOU -- TO FURTHER YOUR OBJECTIVE OF WANTING TO LEAVE OUR COUNTRY?
A. MY OBJECTIVE IN LAFAYETTE PARK IS NOT PRIMARILY TO FURTHER THAT END. THAT IS MY OWN PERSONAL DESIRE. MY OBJECTIVE IN LAFAYETTE PARK IS TO COMMUNICATE TO OTHER PEOPLE THE REASON FOR MY OWN PERSONAL DESIRE TO LEAVE THIS COUNTRY, WHICH IS: I DO NOT FEEL THAT I CAN REMAIN IN THIS COUNTRY WITHOUT CONTRIBUTING TO THE EVILS THAT I SEE, OR TO WHAT I SEE AS EVIL, WITHIN THIS COUNTRY, PRIMARILY THE CONSTRUCTION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
THEREFORE, I LIVE IN THIS WORLD OF THE UNITED STATES, WITHOUT BEING PART OF THIS WORLD OF THE UNITED STATES. IWOULD LIKE, FOR MY OWN PERSONAL DESIRES, TO BE REMOVED FROM THIS ENVIRONMENT WHICH I DO NOT FIND AGREEABLE TO MY MORAL
IDEAS. BUT THAT IS NOT THE REASON THAT I AM IN LAFAYETTE PARK.
THE REASON I AM IN LAFAYETTE PARK IS TO COMMUNICATE MY OPINIONS AND BELIEFS ABOUT THE THINGS FOR WHICH I WANTED TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY.
Q. YES, SIR. NOW, MY LAST QUESTION TO YOU: HOW WERE YOU COMMUNICATING THAT VERY MESSAGE THAT YOU SAY IS THE SINE QUA NON OF YOUR EXISTENCE TO PEOPLE WHO WERE PASSING BY AT 6:00 O'CLOCK ON THE MORNING OF SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 24TH?
A. I WAS ILLUSTRATING THAT, IN ORDER TO REMAIN MORAL WITHIN AN AMORAL SOCIETY, ONE MUST SUFFER PERSONAL DEPRIVATION. ONE MAY BE ENJOINED FROM HOLDING A JOB, WHICH WOULD ENABLE ONE TO RENT A ROOM, SO THAT ONE DIDN'T HAVE TO SLEEP WITHOUT ACCOMMODATIONS ON THE SIDEWALK.
Q. YOU WERE NOT IN A.POSITION TO COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY WITH ANYONE WHEN THE OFFICER CAME UPON YOU ON THE SIDEWALK ON SEPTEMBER 24TH;ISN'T THAT TRUE?
A. I WAS IN NO BETTER -- I WAS IN NO BETTER SITUATION TO COMMUNICATE THAN WAS LAZARUS. I WAS IN NO --
Q. THANK YOU.
A. (CONTINUING) -- BETTER SITUATION TO COMMUNICATE THAN WAS DIOGENES.
MR. SHMANDA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. REDIRECT?
MR. GRADER: JUST ONE QUESTION, YOUR HONOR.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION -- BY MR. GRABER:
Q. ON THE EVENING WHEN OFFICER SHERBA HAD AN ENCOUNTER WITH YOU, DO YOU RECALL WHETHER OR NOT OFFICER JAMES HAD OCCASION TO HAVE AN ENCOUNTER WITH YOU?
A. OFFICER JAMES, ON THE NIGHT OF OFFICER SHERBA?
Q. YES.
Continued.....