THOMAS v. REAGAN
USDC Cr. No. 84-3552
Deposition Continued
Thomas: Do you remember when they were removed from the old
sidewalk?
Duncan: This (unclear) they had been moved, that's why I noted it.
Thomas: That was unusual, that they had been moved, because they
had been there before, and so you made a note because they had been
moved, is that right?
Duncan: (unclear)
Thomas: And they, at that point they had been moved to the bricks,
is that correct?
Duncan: Yes, some of them had been moved to bricks, some of them
had been moved, at the time there was snow fencing, a wooden
slatted fence around the flowerbeds, an awful lot of signs had been
put up there, hung up on the fence, not actually on the bricks.
Thomas: Had there been signs on the bricks prior to April 21 so
far as you know -- or August 21.
Duncan: To my recollection yes, there had been.
Thomas: Would you be specific as to what recollection you had of
signs on the bricks prior to that?
Duncan: I did not take any pictures to document, but I tried to
take my daily (unclear) in the afternoon anywhere from 1:00 to 3:00
just walking through to give it an observation, a count of how many
people were in Lafayette Park, and doing that the whole summer yes
I would say, but I have no specific dates.
Thomas: You don't have any specific recollection, any specific
recollection of signs that were on the bricks that may have broken
the bricks prior to August 21?
Martinez: Your Honor, I'm going to object, I think we've just
gone too far with this brick breakup and everything. The
Administrative Record for the Lafayette Park regulation has all the
reasons in there about the park, damage to the park and everything,
and that if I understand what you've been saying the last few days
is not what's at issue in this deposition. To the extent to what
is at issue, I urge the Court now to have Mr. Thomas move along.
THE COURT: The witness may answer the last question if he
can, if he can't then (unclear) anything he may know about you.
Thomas: Well, could you answer that last question?
Duncan: I would have to say no, I have no specific date.
Thomas: No specific recollection?
Duncan: No recollection of that particular date.
Thomas: I think the question was whether you have specific
recollection of seeing signs on bricks, not on a specific date
other than just prior to August 21 of 1984.
Duncan: You asked me prior to what date, and I'm saying--
Thomas: Okay, I'll try, I'm not too good at asking questions, so
I'll try again. You say, I thought you said that you, well, do you
have any specific recollection of a sign being on the bricks prior
to, that is being on the bricks rather than being on the old
concrete sidewalk, prior to August 21, 1984. You don't have to
give me a date, just specifically did you see a sign, was it a big
sign, was it a small sign, just any specific recollection of a sign
being on the bricks prior to August 21, 1984.
Duncan: At one time there were 140 signs there.
Thomas: Was that prior to or after August 21.
Duncan: After that. Prior to August 21 there were approximately
90.
Thomas: Was that on the old White House, on the old sidewalk, or
was that on the brick sidewalk?
THE COURT: How is that material?
Thomas: Well, it's just material to the point that I'm trying to
get this question answered -- the question that I thought you said
he could answer--
THE COURT: (unclear) you're trying to get an answer, but how
is it maerial to the issues of what police officers did with
reference to you at this point, and I thought what you would want
is whether or not in making these reports he included references to
you in these reports and was there any reason for including any
reference to you.
Thomas: I'm going to get to that.
THE COURT: Well that's why I'm letting you go on down this
line--
Thomas: That's true. But I think--
THE COURT: (unclear)
Thomas: I asked this question, the thing is because there's a
representation in the Federal Register, and I think that, this is
what I'm trying to get at, was there a problem prior to April, to
August 25th (sic), or only after August 25th (sic). And I want to
know, and then this is the last question you said that you were
going to allow and I just want to ask the question before I move on
to something else.
THE COURT: All right.
Thomas: So, could you say specifically that there were signs on
the bricks prior to August 21.
Duncan: Specifically I could say there were signs there, to give
you a factual on which signs they were, no I could not. I did not
document each signs and who they were and what the sign was prior
to August 21.
THE COURT: All right. Just to connect it up at this point,
in connection with your observation of signs and making any of
these reports, did you have occasion to notice Mr. Thomas at all,
or make any notation about him, or was he associated with any of
these signs, did you know?
Duncan: I did not make any notation about Mr. Thomas in any of my
reports. I was letting, since I was new in the Park Service I
didn't know a lot about Lafayette Park. I was told by Park Manager
Carolyn O'Hara that a lot of these signs were Mr. Thomas', but I
had no idea which ones, I mean wasn't specifically picking at your
signs, I was noting that there was increased sign activity taking
place, they were being built, painted, moved from locations.
THE COURT: Okay, just for clarity of the record, Duncan
Exhibits 1 through 5, and the one of the McDaniel exhibits you said
you wrote, six documents, in those documents were you specifically
focussing on Mr. Thomas or any of his activities?
Duncan: No, I was not.
THE COURT: All right Mr. Thomas. That's what I thought you
were getting at (unclear)
Thomas: I'm just trying to figure this -- well, do you know
anything about this (unclear) in Phil Walsh's report? This is
McDaniel deposition exhibit One. Can you shed any light on that?
Duncan: This exhibit for exhibit one for Robert McDaniel was
written by my supervisor, Phil Walsh, with regard to sitting on the
grass rule, which meant not having signs put on the sidewalk. I do
personally know those bricks cost a lot of money and our park
manager does not want us putting vehicles on and trying to wreck
the bricks, so I'm not familiar with this thing on the grass rule,
(unclear), there may be a regulation that says you're not supposed
to have structures on bricks. I do not know.
Thomas: This is --
Duncan: Exhibit No. 5, (unclear)
Thomas: Would you read out that last sentence, I believe it's the
first paragraph?
Duncan: "I had a protester complain about this dilemma and that
two dogs were (unclear) the grass damage under the signs (unclear)
people off the streets who owned the dogs." What I was trying to
say there, a couple of the signs were A-frame, and people had tied
their dogs up to it, and the dogs had tore up the grass
extensively. When you chain a dog up and the dog can't roam they
just pace and dig with their paws, and that's why (unclear).
Thomas: I'm sorry. Also the first sentence there, in that
paragraph.
Duncan: "I observed that all the people had started -- I observed
that all the people living under the large signs in the park on the
east side."
THE COURT: I'm sorry, living?
Duncan: "Living." Well--
Thomas: And then the next sentence is --
Duncan: "I had a protester complain about this dilemma...."
I have to say that's a typographical error on "all" people because
that would be everybody. Since I didn't type this, I don't have a
copy of the notes -- I didn't sign this one, most of them I tried
to sign. But I did, what I'm making reference to is that I noticed
people living under there or I could see (unclear) occupancy
underneath the signs in regards to blankets and clothes and food.
THE COURT: This was when, August of '84?
Duncan: This was August 29, 1984.
THE COURT: Was Mr. Thomas one of those people you're talking
about or somebody else (unclear) who you made reference to?
Duncan: I have, I do not know who the person was.
Thomas: The next sentence is "a protester complained" to you about
what?
Duncan: About having the dog tied up to the post which was
destroying the grass and they did not want to have to take the
blame for something that wasn't done by them.
THE COURT: Could that protester have been Mr. Thomas, do you
recall who it was?
Duncan: I do not recall.
Thomas: And was, and the way I read it, what I really wanted to
understand was, was the complaint also addressed to the fact that
people were living under the signs?
Duncan: According to this, no, just the dogs.
Thomas: According to that, is that--
Duncan: I wrote it, so I'll take responsibility for it.
Thomas: So you don't really remember what, you say that that was
just complaining about the dogs.
Duncan: (unclear)
MARTINEZ: Your Honor, at this point I'm going to assert an
objection. Maybe it's me, but I haven't heard one iota of
evidence, testimony in this deposition that goes to any of the
issues that are before the Court.
THE COURT: The only questions that (unclear) are the
questions that I interjected trying to find out, I was hoping to
try and make it relevant to your conduct, to whether you were the
protester, or whether he saw you with reference to any of this, and
so forth. That's what the purpose of the deposition, and as I say
in the next fifteen or twenty minutes try and focus on what Mr.
Duncan knows about your conduct, not just generalities (unclear)
Thomas: I think that I'm just about finished, your Honor, there
are a few things that --
THE COURT: Well, one of the suggestions earlier when I
allowed Mr. Duncan to be deposed was whether Mr. Duncan ever kept
book on you, surveilled your activities and your conduct, I don't
know whether you want to ask him that or not, that's why I asked
the question (unclear). Have you (unclear) documents or records as
to his activities?
Duncan: No, I have not. I was told back in the spring to present
--
THE COURT: Of what year?
Duncan: 1985, no, 1986, the new regulations going out for signs,
to pass them out to as many street people as I could find to show
the new regula- the proposed regulations, and I did have to make a
note that I looked for you for about four days in a row, I tried to
stagger my times, such as not showing up at three o'clock in the
park that day and try to find you, and I had to make a note that I
couldn't find you, I couldn't physically give you a regulation or
a proposed regulation, that is the only (unclear)
Thomas: (unclear)
THE COURT: What (unclear) did you operate under any
instructions from your immediate supervisor or anyone else to make
notations (unclear) Mr. Thomas (unclear)
Duncan: (unclear)
Thomas: You were given instructions to locate me to give me
(unclear) paper?
Martinez: Objection, your Honor, I don't think he said he
warned him.
THE COURT: All right, well, I think--
Thomas: I just --
THE COURT: Well, I have a question (unclear) interpretation,
I don't think he used the word, (unclear) copy of the proposed
regulations (unclear) if you want to ask him what was his purpose
for doing this (unclear)
Thomas: Were you aware of the purpose for giving me the
regulations?
Duncan: So that you'd know what the regulations were about.
Thomas: Was that instruction from your immediate supervisor?
Duncan: Yes.
Thomas: Phil Walsh?
Duncan:
THE COURT: Was that just to Mr. Thomas, or I believe you said
something about street people generally, do you want to amplify
that (unclear) terminology.
Duncan: People who had signs in the park, (unclear) try to give
them to anybody who would be interested in having them.
THE COURT: Well, was it just Mr. Thomas, or do you know of
any individual who was in the park and who had signs or who had
been demonstrating, or everybody?
Duncan: Everybody.
Thomas: There were instructions to give them to everybody, but
were there specific instructions to give them to me?
Duncan: Since you did have signs up there, I was told that I
should try and get you a copy if I could find you, try to locate
you, just like the other people who had signs and try to locate
them, people if possible (unclear)
Thomas: Try to locate Thomas, William Thomas?
Duncan: Yes.
Thomas: Did he try to tell you to locate anybody else?
Duncan: Yes. Concepcion?
Thomas: Anybody else?
Duncan: I believe Mr. William Page?
Thomas: Hale?
Duncan: William Hale? Yes.
Thomas: Anybody else?
Duncan: To my recollection, no.
Thomas: This is Exhibit 4, last sentence. (unclear)
Duncan: "As a safety note I would like to point out that some of
the large signs were a real danger of hurting someone if a wind
storm comes up announced. Either these signs are not secure at all
or they're too big for the supports which have been given them."
Thomas: The last sentence of the second paragraph.
Duncan: "There was a person broadcasting propaganda through the
park."
Thomas: Do you know who that person was?
Duncan: No I don't.
Thomas: Were you instructed to make reports of that, or...
Duncan: I just noted that some activity was going on in the park
while I was up there so I made reference to it. No I did not get
any orders to find out who that person was or....
Thomas: I think that's probably it, your Honor.
Martinez: Mr. Duncan, have you ever done anything or
engaged in any activities to attempt to deprive Mr. Thomas of his
civil or constitutional rights?
Duncan: No.
Martinez: Are you aware of anyone in the Park Service or Department
of Interior or in fact anyone at all who ever attempted to do that?
Duncan: No.
Martinez: Have you ever engaged in conspiracy with anyone to do
that?
Duncan: No.
Martinez: And are you aware of anyone ever having engaged in a
conspiracy to do that.
Duncan: No.
Martinez: Have you ever in the course of your duties or otherwise
attempted to do damage to any property that Mr. Thomas owns,
including his signs?
Duncan: No.
Martinez: Did you write any of these reports that you've identified
today because of the content of any contained in these signs?
Duncan: No.
Martinez: Do you know a Captain Michael Canfield of the Metropolitan
Police Department?
Duncan: I've probably met him, but I have no idea (unclear)
I've met a lot of Park Police, I would have to see him--
THE COURT: This is a Metropolitan policeman, D.C. police.
Duncan: Oh. No.
Martinez: No recollection.
Duncan: No.
Martinez: Nothing further your Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Thomas, (unclear)
Thomas: (unclear)
THE COURT: I can't think of any questions that I haven't
already asked or that counsel hasn't asked (unclear) consider this
deposition closed.
Case Listing --- Proposition One ---- Peace Park