Today, August 11, 2004 I had the displeasure of attending a hearing in the continuing travesty of justice being carried out by Federal and local officials against Aaron Patterson.
Before entering the courtroom all spectators without Federal identification, were subjected to two security "screenings." One was fairly routine, and has been in place at the Dearborn Street building since the 9-11 violence. Although for the first time I was asked for ID.
The second "screening" occurred on the floor outside of the courtroom in which Aaron Patterson appeaed. At this blockade, with perhaps 10-12 security agents and a muzzled dog looking on, all required identification was electronically scanned with data being sent to some Federal bank.
Is this legal? Constitutional?
More armed guards were posted at various locations within the courtroom, perhaps another 7.
I for one reject the burgeoning police state complete with violations of privacy being committed by those who are, in reality, attempting to intimidate and perhaps thereby inhibit access to courtrooms, protests, and other public demonstrations of dissent.
Please indicate what remedy the ACLU can bring to bear to at least ameliorate the police state character of Federal court hearings.
ROBERT SCHWARTZ
Chicago Anti-Bashing Network
Chicago, Illinoois
Star Chamber Patterson Hearing Conducted in Atmosphere of Intimidation
11 Aug 2004
Date Edited: 11 Aug 2004 09:02:03 PM
To whom it may concern:
Today, August 11, 2004 I had the displeasure of attending a hearing in the continuing travesty of justice being carried out by Federal and local officials against Aaron Patterson.
Before entering the courtroom all spectators without Federal identification, were subjected to two security "screenings." One was fairly routine, and has been in place at the Dearborn Street building since the 9-11 violence. Although for the first time I was asked for ID.
The second "screening" occurred on the floor outside of the courtroom in which Aaron Patterson appeaed. At this blockade, with perhaps 10-12 security agents and a muzzled dog looking on, all required identification was electronically scanned with data being sent to some Federal bank.
Is this legal? Constitutional?
More armed guards were posted at various locations within the courtroom, perhaps another 7.
I for one reject the burgeoning police state complete with violations of privacy being committed by those who are, in reality, attempting to intimidate and perhaps thereby inhibit access to courtrooms, protests, and other public demonstrations of dissent.
Please indicate what remedy the ACLU can bring to bear to at least ameliorate the police state character of Federal court hearings.
ROBERT SCHWARTZ
Chicago Anti-Bashing Network
Chicago, Illinoois