IN THE UN1TED STATES D!STRICT COURT. FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Defendants Exhibit 12 THE COMMUNITY FOR CREATIVE NON-VIOLENCE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CiviL Bction No. 81-2'844. JAMES G. WATT, ET AL., Defendants. FILED Dec. 1, 1981 James E. Davey, Clerk Washington, D.C. Tuesday, November 24, 1981 The above-entitled action came on for hearing on motion of plaintiffs for a temporary restraining order before the Honorable BARRINGTON D. PARKER, United States District Court judge, in Courtroom No. 19, commencing at 3:00 o'clock, p.m. For the Plaintiffs: ILENE J.~JACOBS, ESQ. RALPH S. TYLER, ESQ. Roisman, Reno & Cavenaugh 1016 16th Street, N.W. Suite 800 Washington, D. C. 20036 (202) 659-0050 and M. EUGENE OLSEN. C.S.R. OFFlCIAL REPORTER. U. S. DISTRICT COURT UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE WASHINGTON, D. C. 20001 (202) 755-1920 APPEARANCES (continued): For the Plaintiffs (continued) ARTHUR B. SPITZER, ESQ. American Civil Liberties Union Fund of the National Capital Area 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE. Washington, D. C. 20003 (202) 544-1076 For the defendants: R. CRAIG LAWRENCE, ESQ. Assistant United States Attorney 2832 United States Courthouse Washington,D. C, 20001 (202) 633-4914 ROYCE C. LAMBERTH, ESQ, Assistant United States Attorney 2844 United States Courthouse Washington, D. C. 200Q1 !202) 633-4958 RICHARD ROBBINS, ESQ. . DIANE KELLEY, ESQ. OFFICE of the Sollcitor U. S. Department of the Interior 'Washington, D. C. 20240 THE COURT: Well, they say they would allow them to have dinner from 2:00 to 4:00 on Thursday. Now, what other days would they allow them to have dinner and for what hours? MR. LAWRENCE: Your Honor, that would have to be worked out on an application- by-application basis. As far as I know, they are not applying to provide dinner in the pard except on Thanksgiving Day. My understanding of the application here was that with the exception of breakfast, which was going to be in the park, the middle meal, dinners and other than that would be provided at locations other than in Lafayette Park. The Department of Interior's position is that you may maintain a demonstration in the park. You may maintain a continuous presence in the park to demonstrate the plight 24 hours a day, and you may maintain your demonstration for seven consecutive days and thereafter on a renewable basis so long as there are no intervening applications for similar parkland for a seperate demonstration and that kind of continuous application was recognized to be appropriate, I believe, in O' Hair against Andrus, when the Pope visited and said his Mass on the Mall, and that is at 613 F. 2d, I believe, that the continuous demonstration, the 7-day renewal period. The position of the Department of Interior is that the demonstration is proper, a symbolic campsite is proper, a continuing presence is proper. What the distinction that is made is, is that, camping, providing living accomodations for these plaintiffs in the park on a continuous basis or on any basis to provide living accomodations, is what is prohibited. THE COURT: What is the difference? Suppose some poor unfortunate person doesn't have any place to stay and he just happens to be down in the area of 17th and Pennsylvania Avenue, amd he is just plain fatigued. Do you mean to tell me that even though he may be one of those who asserted and protested that he decides he wants to stretch out on the park bench there and go to sleep, he couldn't do it? MR. LAWRENCE: As to that particular individual, Your Honor, we are obviously beyond the question of the application of the First Amendment or not, and we are obviously not in the question of camping or not. I am not sure what determination is made if someone lays down to sleep on a park bench. It is my understanding that sleeping in the parl is not permitted, but that is not the issue here. What is at issue here is camping in the park and conducting what would be typical camping activities in Lafayette Park. Now the Department of Interior, as evidenced by Exhibit C, has exhibited willingness to work with these plaintiffs to provide camping accomodations where camping is allowed. AFFIDAVIT I, Larry Tucker, hereby state that on or about December 1, 1981, during the early morning hours, I was driving a taxicab. While passing St. Elizabeth's Hospital in southeast Washington D.C. I saw William Thomas walking beside the road. When I asked whether he wanted a ride he got into my cab, and told me he Has going to the White House, where he had earlier been arrested, driven to the southeast edge of town, where the arresting officers had told him to get lost. On arriving at the White House Thomas and I sa t in mp cab, and continued our discussion. When a Park Police patrol cas pulled up to the White House sidewalk, behind my cab, Thomas left the car, and walked away. A female Park Police officer, since identified to me as Officer Anderson, approached my cab, and asked why I had brought Thomas back. I replied that I was doing him a favor. She responded: Well, you didn't do us any favor. We were trying to get rid of him. Larry Signed before me this 2nd day of November,l981, thc signature of Larry Tucker only. Notary Public