AETA 4 Charges Dismissed
Judge throws out indictment in AETA 4 case, new indictment possible
In a ruling issued Monday, a federal judge tossed out the Animal Enterprise Terrorism indictment against four activists. While a victory, this may not be the end for the defendants known as the “AETA 4”.
The dismissal of charges comes after a defense motion to dismiss, citing an unjustly vague indictment which didn’t specify what illegal conduct the four were accused of. On Monday a judge agreed, and threw out the indictment.
Below is an excerpt from the judge’s ruling (from Green is the New Red):
In order for an indictment to fulfill its constitutional purposes, it must allege facts that sufficiently inform each defendant of what it is that he or she is alleged to have done that constitutes a crime. This is particularly important where the species of behavior in question spans a wide spectrum from criminal conduct to constitutionally protected political protest. While “true threats” enjoy no First Amendment protection, picketing and political protest are at the very core of what is protected by the First Amendment. Where the defendants’ conduct falls on this spectrum in this case will very likely ultimately be decided by a jury. Before this case proceeds to a jury, however, the defendants are entitled to a more specific indictment setting forth their conduct alleged to be criminal.
Yet defense attorneys believe the government will issue a new indictment, and the prosecution will continue to trial. Because the indictment was dismissed “without prejudice”, the option for the prosecution to refile remains open.
Joseph Buddenberg, Maryam Khajavi, Nathan Pope and Adriana Stumpo were arrested in February 2009 and charged with Animal Enterprise Terrorism. The indictment only alleged their participation in home demonstrations and the publishing of fliers with addresses of animal researchers.
The case, if charges are refiled, stands to potentially change the landscape of above-ground activism in the United States, making previously protected speech activity prosecutable as “terrorism”.
Read the judge’s ruling here.
– Peter Young
Receive updates via email: Subscribe here.
Reading updates on the AETA 4 is always such a disturbing thing for me, it really makes you wonder how people can call this country a Democracy. I can’t even imagine how terrifying it must be for those four activists, knowing they are being prosecuted as terrorists for exercising their freedoms of speech. A part of me, though, would be really interested to see, if new charges were brought forward and the AETA 4 were convicted, if an appeal would lead to the AETA being declared unconstitutional. I don’t know how hopeful I am of that happening, though, so really I just hope the charges are not re-filed.