Some twenty antiwar activists held a demonstration on a rainy Wednesday morning outside U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia at 3rd & Constitution Ave. The demonstration preceded the third trial resulting from more than 370 arrests at the White House on September 26, 2005, when activists gathered to seek a meeting to discuss an end to the war in Iraq.

The National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance [NCNR] and United For Peace & Justice organized the largest mass action in U.S. Park Police history, and around thirty of the arrestees appeared January 18 in federal court. Several of them had their charges dismissed, three arrestees paid the fine and one defendant was granted a continuance.

Court observers who attended the first two trials sensed a different climate in Judge Deborah Robinson’s courtroom. In contrast to the other judges, she did not want to treat this case as a criminal matter and suggested that those arrested not be called defendants. Both Angela George, the prosecutor, and Mark Goldstone, the attorney advisor, opposed this concept. Mark was concerned that certain rights inherent in a criminal case would be lost. So we did witness the beginning of a criminal trial.

The judge also offered defendants an opportunity to plea “nolo contendre,” the infamous course taken by the disgraced Vice President Spiro Agnew. Two defendants accepted the plea—Leslie Wilson, a self-described soccer mom, and Heather Quaine, all the way from Michigan. They were able to make a statement against the war, and called for time served. The judge agreed to give them time served.

In another ruling, unlike the first two cases, Robinson disagreed with the government’s motion to seat defendants in the well of the court when their respective arresting officer testified. This made it very easy for “suggestive” identification by the officer. Instead, two defendants sat at the defense table with Mark and Mike McNeeley, an attorney representing Maria Allwine, and the others were seated together on benches in the well of the court for the course of the trial.

The trial began with the prosecutor offering an opening statement—the defendants are guilty of demonstrating without a permit. For the defense, Stephanie Eriksen gave an excellent opening statement, and there was applause in the courtroom. Most surprising, the judge made no attempt throughout the day to muffle applause.

The prosecution case began with the U.S. Park Service officer who granted permits for the Ellipse and Lafayette Park. Cindy Farquhar cross-examined him, and he could not explain why a U.S Park Police officer attached to the antiterrorism office was involved in the permit process. As a witness, the officer granting the permits did not offer much to the prosecution case, but that a permit for the White House sidewalk could have been obtained.

The Park Police officer who gave the warnings to leave was the next witness, and his testimony included describing a portion of the police video taken on September 26. A number of defendants had their objections to his testimony sustained by the judge. The officer kept making judgment statements as to the motives of the defendants. Again Cindy showed her persistence in cross-examining the witness. Her intent was to gain an understanding as to why there were advance plans to arrest activists involved in First Amendment activities.

For me, the best part of the video was when hundreds of people were repeatedly chanting “Arrest Bush.” What could be better for two federal prosecutors, a magistrate judge and a Park Police officer to hear? Let us hope the subliminal message is slowly seeping into their consciousness.

After much discussion over the issue of stipulating to identification, a minority of the defendants intend to stipulate. So as the trial proceeds on Thursday, some arresting officers will have to identify some of their defendants. More importantly to the prosecution’s case, they must testify what a defendant actually did on the White House sidewalk. If the officers are truthful, they presumably will admit they probably never saw the defendants until other officers brought them over to be photographed.

As an experienced observer of many, many trials of peace activists, I always argue against the illusion that the court just might acquit these altruistic activists. However, in this case, I am mildly optimistic, as Judge Robinson is giving off an air of sympathy.

The trial will continue on Thursday at 9:15 AM. The best part lies ahead when the pro se defendants present their case against the war and are empowered in the process.

Max Obuszewski will be there to support those who are continuing to take the risks of peace in a federal courthouse a few miles away from the heart of darkness on Pennsylvania Avenue.