Hung Jury Sent Back By Judge to Keep Deliberating in #Freeway9 Case

Court Update from June 26, Los Angeles

June 27, 2019 | revcom.us

 

UPDATE: At 3:30 on June 26, the jury in the #Freeway9 case let the court know they were hopelessly deadlocked on all three counts. The judge sent them back to deliberate and the jury resumes doing so at 9 am June 27.

~~~~~~~~~~

Final arguments were made on Wednesday, June 26, by defense attorney Damon Alimouri and then the final word from the prosecutor for the government which in Orwellian speak is dubbed “the People” in court.

The defense rested on the following salient arguments. Mr. Alimouri reminded the jury of their responsibility to decide the fate of a fellow member of the community and of democracy as a whole. He reminded people of the right to due process, to a fair trial, to free speech, to liberty of thought worship—rights people risk their lives for all over the world. He told the jury why he had taken the case of his defendant pro bono because he felt passionately that his client is innocent and committed no crime. He argued that the government had not proven the charges on any count and in particular had not proven that his client had acted with malice or with intent to annoy or injure anyone. Even after showing countless videos, police witnesses, spending unnecessary time, the prosecution had not produced a shred of evidence to the contrary, direct or circumstantial.

Alimouri cited the way his client’s testimony about why he acted as he had and heralded his courage, emphasizing: “I am ashamed of myself that I don’t have this courage.” He argued that so many in society are disgusted with Donald Trump’s turn towards darkness, disgusted with the attacks on immigrants, ashamed of what has been done to Muslims, to the press, by the energizing of racist forces, by babies ripped from the arms of helpless parents. His client has stood up to the inhumanity and barbarism of this administration. If more people had time from jobs, responsibilities to children and relationships and more, wouldn’t many more do the same?

Addressing the question of why his client had protested on the freeway, Alimouri asked: Why anywhere but? He explained that everything we do is packed with meaning and that in extreme emergency, when there is a need for immediate change, what better way than to disrupt the daily commute and the mentality of business as usual?

Alimouri dissected and refuted the prosecution’s claims that the protest had jeopardized safety, that his client had failed to obey a lawful order, and argued forcefully that a misdemeanor code violation is not a crime.

He cited the court instructions to the jury, that they must have an abiding conviction beyond a reasonable doubt of guilt to convict, emphasizing that “abiding” means permanent. He emphasized that, to convict, they have to be confident that 50 years from now they will still feel his client is guilty. They have to be confident that history won’t look back with shame and regret, that people won’t look back and ask what happened? He asked people to consider how they will look back, will they be remorseful or proud of having stood on the right side of history. Trials like this are going to be in the news. Individual trials will be memorialized in your history books.

He said more, including further refuting the prosecution’s charges and methods, ending with a direct statement to the jury: You have the power to say NO! The only just verdict is not guilty on all counts. That is what is in line with truth and with reality.

This was followed by closing remarks by the prosecution. Then court was adjourned and the jury was sent to deliberate.

Supporters have been wearing shirts into the courthouse every day with questions like, “Would you have convicted Rosa Parks?” and “Would you have convicted the people who hid Anne Frank?”