Categories
News

County warning: School board activists go to trial

Five anti-racist activists were in court October 30, following their arrests at an August 30 special meeting of the Albemarle County School Board. But many community members feel like only one was handed down the verdict she deserved.

While Lara Harrison’s trespassing charge was dropped, four others were convicted of trespassing or obstruction of justice.

“There’s a little history to this,” said defense attorney Janice Redinger, who represented Harrison and Andrea Massey. Both moms were charged with trespassing after allegedly disrupting and refusing to leave the Albemarle County Office Building where the school board meeting was taking place.

At an August 23 meeting, the activists—many with the Hate-Free Schools Coalition of Albemarle County—showed up to speak during the public comment session to ask the school board to ban Confederate imagery and other hate symbols from the division’s dress code. Most didn’t get the chance.

Redinger said in court that Harrison was the only person allowed to speak before the school board shut the meeting down for alleged disruption. Activists were snapping their fingers in agreement with Harrison’s comments, “the least disruptive thing that one can do in order to share your support,” Redinger pointed out. But the school board alleges other disruptive activity such as cheering.

The aborted meeting was continued August 30, but the school board did not allow for any public comment. So some activists decided to hold their own “community meeting” in the lobby outside of Lane Auditorium, she said.

These activists, including Harrison, began chanting, singing, and clapping for their cause. Alleging that they were still disrupting the meeting happening inside of the auditorium behind closed doors, County Executive Jeff Richardson testified that he approached Harrison and another woman and asked multiple times, “Please quiet down or you will have to leave.” He said he never specifically directed any officer to begin making arrests. “My goal was for the group to just quiet down.”

Richardson said he turned to Lieutenant Terry Walls and expressed concern that the activists weren’t quieting down or leaving, and Walls testified that he then began making arrests, starting with Harrison.

Redinger argued that the arrest was unconstitutional because Richardson never explicitly directed Walls to break out the handcuffs, and only Richardson had the authority to make that call.

Judge William Barkley agreed, and dropped Harrison’s charge. Harrison then took a seat in the gallery of the courtroom—among dozens of supporters from the local activist community—to learn the fate of the other three defendants.

“It was vindicating for that moment to hear that the judge agreed that it was an unjust arrest,” says Harrison. “At the same time, I felt very anxious for my co-defendants.”

Massey, Redinger’s second client, wasn’t as lucky. She was inside Lane Auditorium peacefully protesting with tape over her mouth, holding a large banner that said, “RACISTS DON’T GET RE-ELECTED.”

Witnesses agreed that the board meeting remained uninterrupted until an unnamed woman burst into the room to call for help, yelling that activists outside were being “brutalized” by police. Board Chair Kate Acuff ordered her out, and Massey, speaking for the first time, said, “You’re being ridiculous.”

“Immediately, without resolution, without delay, Kate Acuff ordered her to leave and directed the police toward [Massey],” said Redinger. Though Acuff read a statement at the beginning of the meeting, which said any disruption would result ejection, Redinger argued that Massey couldn’t have disrupted the meeting, because it had already been disrupted when the woman barged in and called for help. For that reason, Redinger said there were no grounds to arrest Massey.

But the judge said Massey’s failure to leave after being asked to by Acuff and an officer was enough to find her guilty of trespassing.

Defense attorney Andrew Sneathern adopted Redinger’s argument for his client, Sabr Lyon, who was inside the meeting with Massey, and was also found guilty of trespassing.

With tape over her mouth, and holding her own sign, Lyon stepped away from her seat and moved closer to the podium at the front of the auditorium. But Sneathern said she never said word until she was being arrested.

According to prosecutor Juan Vega, Acuff gave Lyon a warning and asked her to leave. Her arresting officer testified he wasn’t specifically asked to arrest her and said he attempted to get her to leave without being arrested. Lyon allegedly said, “It’s up to you,” and left peacefully when he cuffed her and escorted her out. The judge found her guilty of trespassing.

Last up was Francis Richards, who got caught in the commotion outside of the auditorium. He said he saw a man grab a friend of his and he inserted himself between them to protect her.

The man turned out to be Deputy Police Chief Greg Jenkins, who was in plainclothes and who testified that he announced he was an officer. But several others testified that they didn’t hear him and had no idea who he was.

Defense attorney Bruce Williamson examined video of the chaos, and said if Jenkins ever truly announced his position, no one reacted. And while Jenkins testified that he had a badge, handcuffs, and a gun, Williamson said they weren’t visible.

Richards, who was charged with trespassing and obstruction of justice, was found guilty of the latter.

The prosecutor asked for a 60-day jail sentence for Richards because his encounter was physical, and 30-day sentences for Massey and Lyon. He wanted all of the activists to be banned from the county office building and school board meetings for two years.

The judge suspended the sentences on the condition of good behavior for two years, but chose to convict them to send a message.

Samantha Peacoe, who was also arrested for obstruction of justice, entered a plea deal before the trials and was sentenced to 30-days with all time suspended.

“We’re disappointed but not surprised by the judge’s upholding of white supremacy by targeting and finding guilty peaceful protesters that should have never been arrested in the first place,” says Harrison. “Every time we’re faced with the state trying to silence us and intimidate us into stopping what we’re doing, we just show up stronger.”

Walt Heinecke, an associate professor at UVA who observed the trials, says he found them “troubling and problematic.”

“[It] was just a spectacle orchestrated by the school division, the county government, and the commonwealth’s attorney to signal a message to citizens who want to actively participate in dissent in government processes that they will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law,” he says.

It’s as if public dissent has become illegal, he adds.

“I’d like to remind everybody that when I was a teenager during the ‘60s and early ‘70s, there were dissenters in American blowing up banks, blowing up government installations,” he says,  “and now we’ve gotten to a point where if someone snaps their fingers, it’s a national security threat.”

Categories
News

Found guilty: Theologian banned from UVA for life appeals decision

When about 40 protesters gathered at the University of Virginia School of Law library April 25 to chase off Jason Kessler, one man was arrested—and it wasn’t the one who brought hundreds of torch-wielding white supremacists to Grounds.

Eric Martin, a local activist and theologian, entered the private room where Kessler was studying, sat down, and quietly began reading The Rise and Fall of Apartheid. On October 2, Judge William Barkley found Martin guilty of trespassing and sentenced him to 30 days in jail, with all of the time suspended on the condition of two years of good behavior. He has also been banned from UVA for life.

Martin says he entered the room because he and the other protesters were unsure whether university officials were providing a safe space for Kessler.

“I just thought it would help clarify the status—does he have a private office or not?” Martin told C-VILLE in May. “And the second thing I thought was, ‘Hold up. They had eight months to protect their students by barring this white supremacist who brought people that maced and beat students and beat one of the librarians into a stroke.’”

A Charlottesville police officer and Stephen Parr, the law school’s chief administrative officer, asked Martin to leave the private librarian’s room. When Martin politely declined, as heard on a police body cam video shown in court, he was arrested for trespassing and removed in handcuffs.

Martin has appealed his conviction, and a trial date will be set in December, according to his attorney, Bruce Williamson.

“You don’t go to courtrooms for any kind of justice,” said Bill Streit, Martin’s friend, supporter, and fellow theologian, outside the courthouse. “If we lived in a just society, there would be no racism. White supremacy would be reconciled by justice.”

Kessler, meanwhile, has been banned from Grounds for four years.

In other white supremacy-related court news, Tyler Davis, the Florida man accused of participating in the August 12, 2017, Market Street Parking Garage beating of DeAndre Harris, pleaded not guilty to malicious wounding in Charlottesville Circuit Court on October 4. He’ll go to trial in February, while two others who participated in the beating have already been found guilty and are serving six and eight year sentences.

And Baltimore-based KKK leader Richard Preston was in the same courtroom that day, to request new counsel for an appeal.

In May, Preston pleaded no contest and was found guilty of firing a gun within 1,000 feet of a school on the day of the Unite the Right rally, when Corey Long famously pointed an improvised flamethrower in the vicinity of the Klansman. Both men claimed to be acting in self-defense, and Preston was sentenced to four years in prison.

In entering the no contest plea, Preston waived all rights to an appeal, says legal expert David Heilberg. However, if Preston wants to object to the advice he received from his lawyer, he has to exhaust the state appeals process first before he can file a habeas petition to complain about the legal representation he got.

Categories
News

Court conundrum: A failed referendum and a wish to avoid one

 

The Board of Supervisors’ interest in relocating Albemarle County’s houses of justice from their current location on Court Square and into their own jurisdiction has been overshadowed with opposition, but county attorney Greg Kamptner thinks he may have found a way to circumvent the need for public approval.

He told supervisors at their May 3 meeting that a bill passed in this year’s General Assembly session, House Bill 2313, says, “in the case of the removal of a county courthouse that is not located in a city or town and is not being relocated to a city or town, such removal shall not require a petition or approval by the voters.”

Kamptner says HB2313 applies because Court Square is within Albemarle County and not the corporate limits of Charlottesville. “Before the Board chose that option, it would thoroughly consider the comments and other input received from the public,” he says in an email.

The BOS will hold a work session on June 14, when county staff will give the supes an update on the hiring of a development adviser and exploring partnership possibilities for the court relocation, according to Kamptner.

“The bill was passed 98 to nothing,” says Bruce Williamson, chair of the BAR-Bench Committee of the Charlottesville-Albemarle Bar Association. “It is questionable whether or not the local members of the House of Delegates or State Senate understood that this bill might affect the ability of Albemarle County to move the courthouse from where it is to a different location.”

Williamson says, “They have the absolute right to locate their courts where they wish to locate them. The bigger question is is it good for the county and is it good for entire city and county community?”

Since the Albemarle Board of Supervisors passed a 4-2 resolution in November directing staff to explore options to relocate one or both of the courthouses, Williamson has been vocal about his opposition.

In November, he said, “This has been couched as a matter of convenience for lawyers. Nothing could be further from the truth. Adding in travel time to the urban ring would increase costs, reduce the number of cases public defenders could take and keep more people incarcerated while they wait for a hearing.”

And it isn’t only happening here.

In Staunton, a similar issue arose when Augusta County supervisors called for a referendum vote to move their courthouse from the downtown area to Verona. It failed when about two-thirds of county residents voted to keep it in its place, though six of seven supervisors supported the move. In this case, the attorney general has said the court cannot legally expand to a lot across the street from the courthouse, so supervisors are searching for another option.

“As far as what we can do, we’re very limited,” says Tracy Pyles, chair of the Augusta supervisors. “So we’re asking for some changes in the rules governing us.”

Currently, if a referendum vote fails, the board can’t initiate another one for 10 years. While his staff hopes that can be amended, Pyles offers advice to the local BOS.

“If they’re going to go to referendum, I know the mistakes we’ve made and I know the limitations we all work under,” he says. “First of all, try to have your cost estimate as realistic as possible.”

For instance, he believes a major reason the public voted against moving its courthouse was the $45 million price tag, which was the worst-case scenario, and would most likely cost about $35 million.

“We took the estimate of everything, which included things like $3 million for office furniture—that was never going to be the case,” he says.

He also recommends documenting the ongoing operating cost to keep the courthouse in place and to move it, he says, by noting details such as accruals in tax revenue and the cost of lawyers relocating. “Be able to really show why you intend to do it. If you can’t show monetary savings and efficiency improvement, you’re hard-pressed to say why.”

Categories
News

Legal question: Can supes order Albemarle court move?

When the Albemarle Board of Supervisors passed a 4-2 resolution on November 2 directing county staff to explore options to relocate one or both of its houses of justice from downtown’s Court Square, Commonwealth’s Attorney Robert Tracci fired back with a letter questioning whether the supes even have the authority to make such a move.

The board “lacks any legal, institutional, substantive or practical basis” to make decisions about the administration of justice, wrote Tracci. “The board is a legislative body with limited executive power—it has no judicial or law enforcement authority whatsoever.”

The idea of moving Albemarle’s circuit and general district courts from Court Square has met wide opposition from those in the legal community, including both city and county prosecutors, sheriffs, clerks of court, Judge Cheryl Higgins, public defenders, Legal Aid Justice Center and the barristers who practice in city and county courts.

“The Board of Supervisors is totally ill-equipped to ascertain whether dismembering Court Square will undermine the quality of justice in our community,” says Tracci. “They are a quasi-legislative executive body with no judicial authority whatsoever and their overreach here is breathtaking.”

Bruce Williamson, chair of the Bench-Bar Relations Committee at the Charlottesville Albemarle Bar Association, says the members of the BOS are “not well-suited by their training and experience with the legal system to make decisions on the administration of justice and the people who are are the ones who signed that letter”—a missive dated November 2 that urges the board to keep county courts in Court Square.

“This has been couched as a matter of convenience for lawyers,” says Williamson. “Nothing could be further from the truth. Adding in travel time to the urban ring would increase costs, reduce the number of cases public defenders could take and keep more people incarcerated while they wait for a hearing,” he says.

Although the plan had long been to renovate the Levy Opera House across the street from the county courts, with the city pitching in $7 million, supervisors “were surprised” last summer to find the city had done nothing about parking, says Williamson, and they “were taken aback” when the city asked them to pony up $2.5 million for parking.

Earlier this year, the supes directed county staff to examine options for courts, including moving the general district court to the County Office Building on McIntire Road, as well as moving both general district and circuit court to a new county location in the urban ring, ideally with a private partnership.

“County staff is clearly in favor of tying economic development to moving the courts,” says Williamson. “For decades, [the county] has not attracted jobs. The courts should not be the engine of economic development.”

The county seat is where the circuit court is located, and to move the circuit court would require a referendum of Albemarle voters, according to code. As for moving the general district court, the answer varies, depending upon whom you ask.

A call to Supervisor Diantha McKeel resulted in a written response from County Attorney Greg Kamptner, who says Virginia code makes the Board of Supervisors responsible for providing courthouses—and for footing the bill of such facilities.

“The board will not decide whether the court facilities are to be relocated from their current location in Court Square in downtown Charlottesville,” writes Kamptner. That decision rests with the voters of Albemarle, he says. “The board’s role is to consider adopting a resolution asking the court to order that election.”

According to Williamson, to move the general district court, the BOS has to have the approval of the General Assembly.

Delegate Rob Bell refers that question to Dave Cotter in the General Assembly’s division of legal services, and Cotter gets into the weeds of murkily written legislation.

Cotter says, according to Virginia code, county supervisors don’t have the authority to move the general district court, which the law requires be located at the county seat. However, the chief judge or the presiding judge—the code lists both—can authorize an additional general district court, much as Richmond has done with additional general district courts.

Albemarle’s general district court webpage lists Judge Bob Downer as both the chief and presiding judge, and Judge William Barkley as the presiding judge. So does that mean one or both of them determine the fate of a lower court move?

“It’s not the Board of Supervisors’ decision to move the general district court,” says Cotter. “Only the chief judge can make the decision to meet somewhere in addition to the county seat.”

Confusing?

The last time this statute was interpreted by the attorney general was in 1973. Says Cotter, “A lot of this language has been sitting here and no one has been paying attention.”

Augusta County had a referendum to move its county seat from Staunton to Verona on the ballot November 8. Voters rejected that relocation.

 Correction 11/17/16: Bruce Williamson said the city wanted the county to contribute $2.5 million for parking, not $12.5 million.