Portland woman thrown in jail for refusing grand jury inquisition

[Jamie6.5]

And that's why the three people rotting in prison now have been charged with property crimes. Oh wait, they haven't.

Gotta love the government shills yapping about how "anarchists" deserve this type of treatment due to their politics. Is it really that hard to picture the regime using the exact same grand jury inquisition to imprison gun owners when the "assault rifle" ban returns?

As anyone that followed the David Pyles discussions on here will tell you, I am far from a "government shill."

Furthermore, anyone that has watched the videos posted all over youtube documenting the black-block anarchist's actions can attest to the FACT that these people's actions were both willful and destructive.
Therefore, someone needs to pay for that destruction.

How do you believe that should take place? Want to send them a letter requesting the cash for replacement of your slashed tires? Broken windows?
Think they'll pay up?

Should the cities of Seattle and Portland just raise taxes or water rates on innocent citizens to pay for repairs to police cars, parks, signage, buildings etc?

Civil disobedience in blocking traffic, or shouting down a city council is one thing.
Civil disobedience resulting in property damage to private property, and destroying public resources is something else altogether.

 

[dmancornell]

As anyone that followed the David Pyles discussions on here will tell you, I am far from a "government shill."

Furthermore, anyone that has watched the videos posted all over youtube documenting the black-block anarchist's actions can attest to the FACT that these people's actions were both willful and destructive.
Therefore, someone needs to pay for that destruction.

How do you believe that should take place? Want to send them a letter requesting the cash for replacement of your slashed tires? Broken windows?
Think they'll pay up?

Should the cities of Seattle and Portland just raise taxes or water rates on innocent citizens to pay for repairs to police cars, parks, signage, buildings etc?

Civil disobedience in blocking traffic, or shouting down a city council is one thing.
Civil disobedience resulting in property damage to private property, and destroying public resources is something else altogether.

None of these people have been proven to be black-bloc members (not a crime in itself), or to have committed vandalism during protests. If that have committed property crimes, then by all means jail them.

An anarchist is not necessarily a black-block rioter, that's just government kool-aid to scare the sheeple. The article mentions these people were SWAT raided simply for being vocal members of the community (i.e. thoughtcrime).

Of course the real solution to the black-bloc "problem" (I hesitate to call it that because it is so insignificant) is to have the private property owners arm themselves, but that solution would be inconceivable to the local power-mongers.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Of course the real solution to the black-bloc "problem" (I hesitate to call it that because it is so insignificant) is to have the private property owners arm themselves, but that solution would be inconceivable to the local power-mongers.

That's what it's coming to.
Private property owners have rights too. If they move to defend their property and are challenged physically by the anarchists, there could easily be bloodshed.

So, should the government intervene at this point to determine who the perpetrators are and extract restitution from them? Prevent them from doing further damage?

Or wait until Ms. Plante's friends are bleeding out?

And furthermore, do Ms. Plante and her friends have the good sense and fortitude to stand up and point out the thugs before a grand jury?
Or do you think she'd be better served by candle light vigils and and memorials to her dead friends?

 

[Jamie6.5]

None of these people have been proven to be black-bloc members (not a crime in itself), or to have committed vandalism during protests. If that have committed property crimes, then by all means jail them.

An anarchist is not necessarily a black-block rioter, that's just government kool-aid to scare the sheeple. The article mentions these people were SWAT raided simply for being vocal members of the community (i.e. thoughtcrime).

You have also abandoned the pursuit of any conspiracy to commit charges.
If this was planned, then those that did the planning, and/or facilitated the planning and arming of the perps can and should be prosecuted.

And yes, that includes the wink-wink/nudge-nudge crowd that knows it's going to happen, who they can rely on to do it, but yet stand before the crowd and claims they are organizing a "peaceful" protest.

But before that can happen, those responsible for the public's trust must convene a GJ to determine if they have the evidence to move forward with an indictment.
Ms. Plante may have been asked many questions related to, but not incriminating, to the anarchists and their involvement with black-bloc members at the GJ hearing.
But as long as she's afraid to testify AT ALL, I guess we'll never know.

If she really believes in what she's doing, she will stand up before a GJ and proclaim her rights and justifications for the actions of her and her friends, and be judged accordingly.

As it stands, she's acting like a coward that benefits no one and no ideology.

 

[dmancornell]

You have also abandoned the pursuit of any conspiracy to commit charges.
If this was planned, then those that did the planning, and/or facilitated the planning and arming of the perps can and should be prosecuted.

And yes, that includes the wink-wink/nudge-nudge crowd that knows it's going to happen, who they can rely on to do it, but yet stand before the crowd and claims they are organizing a "peaceful" protest.

But before that can happen, those responsible for the public's trust must convene a GJ to determine if they have the evidence to move forward with an indictment.
Ms. Plante may have been asked many questions related to, but not incriminating, to the anarchists and their involvement with black-bloc members at the GJ hearing.
But as long as she's afraid to testify AT ALL, I guess we'll never know.

If she really believes in what she's doing, she will stand up before a GJ and proclaim her rights and justifications for the actions of her and her friends, and be judged accordingly.

As it stands, she's acting like a coward that benefits no one and no ideology.

Fine, then gather the evidence, prove the supposed conspiracy then prosecute accordingly. No need for this BS.

In any case, I don't believe they are afraid to testify, they simply view the entire bureaucratic law with contempt, as any sane person should. That's not cowardice, it's moral clarity.

Their politics and involvement with the anarchist community is their own business. Last time I checked we still have the right to freely associate. Technically she could go up there and try to make a speech before the government functionaries but I doubt the state will let her do that, so what's the point?

 

[dmancornell]

That's what it's coming to.
Private property owners have rights too. If they move to defend their property and are challenged physically by the anarchists, there could easily be bloodshed.

So, should the government intervene at this point to determine who the perpetrators are and extract restitution from them? Prevent them from doing further damage?

Or wait until Ms. Plante's friends are bleeding out?

And furthermore, do Ms. Plante and her friends have the good sense and fortitude to stand up and point out the thugs before a grand jury?
Or do you think she'd be better served by candle light vigils and and memorials to her dead friends?

You mean the government will intervene weeks after the fact, flailing pathetically with SWAT raids and unconstitutional witch-hunts, desperately trying to reassert their notion of authority over the people. What else is left, after we paid them to fail miserably at doing the real jobs of protecting private property and arresting individual offenders?

In any case, I guarantee you the black-bloc are far more intimated by a private armed citizen than some cops in riot gear. To them, the police is the state, an armed citizen is a really pissed off guy with a gun.

 

[Jamie6.5]

In any case, I guarantee you the black-bloc are far more intimated by a private armed citizen than some cops in riot gear. To them, the police is the state, an armed citizen is a really pissed off guy with a gun.

I lived in Eugene when the anarchists decided to party in the streets circa 2000.
When a young man was on his way to the OB-GYN with his pregnant wife, stuck in the traffic jam the anarchists created, a black-bloc(er) decided to tap-dance on the car's hood, doing hundreds of dollars worth of damage.
So he got out of the car and did something about it, armed with a tire iron.

What did the black-bloc perp do?
He started shouting for police protection.

It's their modus operandi DMan. They are cowards that hide behind the rights afforded them by our system, while decrying those that make said system work.
They contribute little more than mayhem, and attempt to convince others that they have "moral clarity."

If you believe that LE should gather the evidence to convict them, but decry the means that LE has used, though due process, to acquire that evidence, then you fail to understand both the system and how it is legally applied.

And as long as you (choose to) fail to understand, you can rail at "the system" all you want, and NEVER change anything.
And as long as people like Ms. Plante choose to have their efforts diminished by the actions of thugs and cowards that serve no purpose other than to destroy others' property, then she will be judged by those she chooses to "freely associate" with.
It won't be the first time, and I seriously doubt it will be the last.

In the meantime, I hope she enjoys the food and lodging.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Their politics and involvement with the anarchist community is their own business. Last time I checked we still have the right to freely associate.

Right up to the point where her and her ideological friends start doing damage to that which belongs to others, whether though public or private ownership.

That's why there are laws to protect private as well as public property.

And if she refuses to cooperate with the investigation into those that committed the damage, then she can suffer the consequences.
She knew what those consisted of going in.
I would wager she is reveling in her martyrdom at the moment.

And if you believe in what she and her friends did, you should be applauding.

Me. I believe that the organizers of the event(s) and the participants that took no steps to police their own should continue to suffer at the hands of those in the public trust that we hire to enforce the laws as they stand.

Don't like those laws? Change them.
There is a process to do that, and it doesn't involve smashing windows and slashing tires.
Those are the actions of a spoiled child.
And like most spoiled children that throw tantrums nowadays, she's been given a "time-out."

 

[dmancornell]

I lived in Eugene when the anarchists decided to party in the streets circa 2000.
When a young man was on his way to the OB-GYN with his pregnant wife, stuck in the traffic jam the anarchists created, a black-bloc(er) decided to tap-dance on the car's hood, doing hundreds of dollars worth of damage.
So he got out of the car and did something about it, armed with a tire iron.

What did the black-bloc perp do?
He started shouting for police protection.

It's their modus operandi DMan. They are cowards that hide behind the rights afforded them by our system, while decrying those that make said system work.
They contribute little more than mayhem, and convince others that they have "moral clarity."

Cool story bro. Now how is this relevant to the case at hand? Did Ms Plante do a tap-dance on a car? No, she wasn't even physically present at the protest which supposedly started the "investigation". Go figure.

By the way, the system doesn't guarantee your rights. The system merely attempts to apply the law, which has been corrupted for decades. Tell me, did the cops actually arrest the dancer? If not, then that's *their* failure. What the perp demands from the cops is irrelevant. He does actually have a right to a fair trial and due process, regardless of his idiocy, and that's something Ms. Plante is not getting.

If you believe that LE should gather the evidence to convict them, but decry the means that LE has used, though due process, to acquire that evidence, then you fail to understand both the system and how it is legally applied.

Oh, I fully understand the system and its legal methods of applying force. I simply think it is corrupt and immoral. Feel free to explain how dragging people before government tribunals and compelling them to incriminate others under penalty of imprisonment is "due process". That's not evidence gathering, that's violent coercion.

And as long as people like Ms. Plante choose to have their efforts diminished by the actions of thugs and cowards that serve no purpose other than to destroy others' property, then she will be judged by those she chooses to "freely associate" with.
It won't be the first time, and I seriously doubt it will be the last.

By that logic, many police union reps should be tossed in prison for protecting killers and violent criminals within their own ranks. Let me know when that happens, then I will expect Ms Plante to go through her shameful treatment.

 

[dmancornell]

Right up to the point where her and her ideological friends start doing damage to that which belongs to others, whether though public or private ownership.

That's why there are laws to protect private as well as public property.

And if she refuses to cooperate with the investigation into those that committed the damage, then she can suffer the consequences.
She knew what those consisted of going in.
I would wager she is reveling in her martyrdom at the moment.

And if you believe in what she and her friends did, you should be applauding.

Me. I believe that the organizers of the event(s) and the participants that took no steps to police their own should continue to suffer at the hands of those in the public trust that we hire to enforce the laws as they stand.

Don't like those laws? Change them.
There is a process to do that, and it doesn't involve smashing windows and slashing tires.
Those are the actions of a spoiled child.
And like most spoiled children that throw tantrums nowadays, she's been given a "time-out."

You obviously have no clue whatsoever on what anarchy is all about, other than what you hear from the government talking heads on cable news. The SWAT gestapo raided her apartment looking for anarchist literature, as if that alone means she knows the perpetrators.

I own anarchist literature, I own black clothing (no black mask though), well damn, guess I better prepare for the midnight visit by the chekists. You'd support that, since I satisfy your meager requirements of guilt by association.

 

[Father of four]

I am for the right of people having free speech. If speech turns into violence then I do not agree with that freedom anymore.
I believe in the right of the people to plead the 5th. If you are innocent or guilty you should still have that right.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Feel free to explain how dragging people before government tribunals and compelling them to incriminate others under penalty of imprisonment is "due process". That's not evidence gathering, that's violent coercion.

Wrong.
The people that sit on a grand jury are people like me that vote, and participate in society daily.
It's not a "government tribunal."

Like I said, if you choose to fail to understand, that's your business, and you're entitled to it.
But you aren't entitled to your own facts, nor the erroneous deductions you arrive at through them.

 

[dmancornell]

Wrong.
The people that sit on a grand jury are people like me that vote, and participate in society daily.
It's not a "government tribunal."

Like I said, if you choose to fail to understand, that's your business, and you're entitled to it.
But you aren't entitled to your own facts, nor the erroneous deductions you arrive at through them.

And like I said before, the people sitting on the jury are irrelevant, since non-cooperation means not showing up. It's still a government tribunal since it was organized by the apparatchiks and enforced with violent coercion. Not my problem you can't read.

Odd how you can simply not talk to cops, or not even show up for interviews when requested, but when the courts convene this tribunal, then the state can imprison one for doing the same.

Tell me again how this grand jury is due process.

 

[Father of four]

Cool story bro. Now how is this relevant to the case at hand? Did Ms Plante do a tap-dance on a car? No, she wasn't even physically present at the protest which supposedly started the "investigation". Go figure.

By the way, the system doesn't guarantee your rights. The system merely attempts to apply the law, which has been corrupted for decades. Tell me, did the cops actually arrest the dancer? If not, then that's *their* failure. What the perp demands from the cops is irrelevant. He does actually have a right to a fair trial and due process, regardless of his idiocy, and that's something Ms. Plante is not getting.



Oh, I fully understand how the system and its legal methods of applying force. I simply think it is corrupt and immoral. Feel free to explain how dragging people before government tribunals and compelling them to incriminate others under penalty of imprisonment is "due process". That's not evidence gathering, that's violent coercion.



By that logic, many police union reps should be tossed in prison for protecting killers and violent criminals within their own ranks. Let me know when that happens, then I will expect Ms Plante to go through her shameful treatment.

"Oh, I fully understand how the system and its legal methods of applying force. I simply think it is corrupt and immoral. Feel free to explain how dragging people before government tribunals and compelling them to incriminate others under penalty of imprisonment is "due process". That's not evidence gathering, that's violent coercion."

Excellent quote.

We need government, laws, rules and regulations. But some of the things our "Legal" system does is not moral at all.

 

[Jamie6.5]

You obviously have no clue whatsoever on what anarchy is all about, other than what you hear from the government talking heads on cable news.

No actually, I believe anarchy means this:

Etymology

The word "Anarchy" comes from the ancient Greek ἀναρχία, anarchia, from ἀν an, "not, without" +‎ ἀρχός arkhos, "ruler", meaning "absence of a leader", "without rulers"). The word ἀρχός archos, ruler, is also closely related to the word αρχή arkhē, meaning "beginning, origin". [7][8] Living without rulers, in this sense, would be akin to living without origins.

Unlike most of the "anarchists" in the U.S. that believe it means no government and/or no government organization.
There can be a hierarchical structure that protects people's property, and allows for advancement socially and economically without a "leader," but not without a set of rules.
Without rules and social structure, you have nothing but thuggery and survival-of-the-fittest, and little or no consequences for one's actions.
Which is precisely what the communo-anarchist movement is advocating, and why it is so disingenuous for them to hide behind the BoR in their efforts to bring down the structure of the country.

Don't confuse "rules" with "rulers," they aren't the same thing.

 

[dmancornell]

No actually, I believe anarchy means this:

Unlike most of the "anarchists" in the U.S. that believes it means no government and/or no government organization.
There can be a hierarchical structure that protects people's property, and allows for advancement socially and economically without a "leader," but not without a set of rules.
Without rules and social structure, you have nothing but thuggery and survival-of-the-fittest, and little or no consequences for one's actions.
Which is precisely what the communo-anarchist movement is advocating, and why it is so disingenuous for them to hide behind the BoR in their efforts to bring down the structure of the country.

Ever heard of voluntarism? In any case, your "thuggery" line indeed does prove your knowledge of the anarchist community is nothing more than government soundbites, so I totally understand your prejudice and lack of logical reasoning.

In another time, you'd be called a McCarthyite.

Don't confuse "rules" with "rulers," they aren't the same thing.

Implying the bureaucratic law is not created by the ruling class for their benefit.

 

[Jamie6.5]

And like I said before, the people sitting on the jury are irrelevant, since non-cooperation means not showing up. It's still a government tribunal since it was organized by the apparatchiks and enforced with violent coercion. Not my problem you can't read.

I read just fine thank you. Apparently better than you do.

Tell me again how this grand jury is due process.

Maybe you should read up on the laws concerning the GJ.
And if you don't like the law, you can advocate for change.
Or you can come in here and whine and snivel and cry and call people names, and imply that you're morally superior,....

But it doesn't change the fact that we all live under these laws, and we have for some time, and up to this point, they have worked fairly well.

And they wouldn't be necessary if it weren't for a few idiots that didn't get what they wanted out of life so they insist of breaking/damaging that which belongs to others.
At the heart of the ideology is the idea that no one should own property, therefore they would get to share in what currently belongs to you, and me and everyone else.

Screw that. let them earn it, or let them try to take the country down the path of collectivism.
Then we'll all know who the enemies are, and I won't have to worry about any compunctions that arise when I take the necessary steps to liberate myself from their lunacy.
Like sit on a GJ, and vote to hang their azzes in the public square at high noon.

But hey, that's just me, ya know!

 

[Jamie6.5]

Ever heard of voluntarism? In any case, your "thuggery" line indeed does prove your knowledge of the anarchist community is nothing more than government soundbites, so I totally understand your prejudice and lack of logical reasoning.

In another time, you'd be called a McCarthyite.

So, you're a Communist (note the big "C") now Dman?
Prejudice?
Lack of understanding?

You have twisted the term anarchy to reflect something it never was.
And compounded that with the term communo-anarchy which attempts to blend the opposing ideologies of minimal government with maximum government,...

And you accuse me of a "lack of logical reasoning?"

Amazing, simply amazing.

 

[dmancornell]

Maybe you should read up on the laws concerning the GJ.
And if you don't like the law, you can advocate for change.
Or you can come in here and whine and snivel and cry and call people names, and imply that you're morally superior,....

But it doesn't change the fact that we all live under these laws, and we have for some time, and up to this point, they have worked fairly well.

And most Germans lived just fine under the Nuremberg Laws. What's your point?

If I got a dime for every time someone pulled the "if you don't like the law, change it" argument, I wouldn't be busting my behind paying for the police to suck at their jobs. As this case demonstrates, the state rewards non-compliance with crushing violence, and the bureaucratic law is supported by shills who totally fail to understand due process because of their prejudices against the Others.

And they wouldn't be necessary if it weren't for a few idiots that didn't get what they wanted out of life so they insist of breaking/damaging that which belongs to others.
At the heart of the ideology is the idea that no one should own property, therefore they would get to share in what currently belongs to you, and me and everyone else.

Protip: No one should own private property is communism. You have your ideologically challenged anarcho-communists putzing around, but I seriously doubt noted anarchist Murray Rothbard is against owning property.

Screw that. let them earn it, or let them try to take the country down the path of collectivism.
Then we'll all know who the enemies are, and I won't have to worry about any compunctions that arise when I take the necessary steps to liberate myself from their lunacy.
Like sit on a GJ, and vote to hang their azzes in the public square at high noon.

But hey, that's just me, ya know!

TLDR.

 

[dmancornell]

So, you're a Communist (note the big "C") now Dman?
Prejudice?
Lack of understanding?

You have twisted the terms anarchy to reflect something it never was.
And compounded that with the term communo-anarchy which attempts to blend the opposing ideologies of minimal government with maximum government,...

And you accuse me of a "lack of logical reasoning?"

Amazing, simply amazing.

McCarthyism is no longer a term specifically dealing with anti-communism, it is a general term for political witch-hunts. Like I said, "in another time".