Posted on 12/14/2004 9:29:21 AM PST by Map Kernow
A federal appeals court denied an emergency appeal to stop prosecution of 11 Philadelphia-area Christians who allege the District Attorney's office retaliated against them for exercising their constitutional rights at a homosexual event in which they were arrested and later charged with felonies.
As WorldNetDaily reported, on Oct. 10, the group was "preaching God's Word" to a crowd of people attending the outdoor Philadelphia "OutFest" event and displaying banners with biblical messages.
After a confrontation with a group called the Pink Angels, described by protesters as "a militant mob of homosexuals," the eleven Christians were arrested and spent a night in jail.
Eight charges were filed, including three felonies and five misdemeanors. The charges were criminal conspiracy, possession of instruments of crime, reckless endangerment of another person, ethnic intimidation, riot, failure to disperse, disorderly conduct and obstructing highways.
Early last week, the American Family Association's Center for Law & Policy filed papers in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania seeking a temporary restraining order that would prevent the city of Philadelphia from prosecuting the case.
Judge Petrese Tucker denied the Philadelphia 11's request, and the CLP immediately appealed the decision to the Third Circuit, which upheld it.
"This turn of events is beyond belief," said Brian Fahling, senior trial attorney for the CLP.
At the hearing, the CLP presented what it called "undisputed" video evidence that captured the "Outfest" events on tape, showing the Philadelphia 11 cooperated with police and were continually harassed by the Pink Angels.
None of the Pink Angels was cited or arrested.
"Despite the undisputed evidence placed before the court, our action for emergency relief was denied not once, but twice," Fahling added. "Many had thought an outcome like this ended at Selma.
"It seems that the Philadelphia 11 have become second-class citizens in the City of Brotherly Love," he said.
A preliminary hearing takes place today at 9 a.m. in Philadelphia.
The ethnic intimidation charge stems from Pennsylvania's "hate crimes" law – to which the newest "victim" category of "sexual orientation" was recently added. The protesters say a Philadelphia police officer told them that because they were on a public sidewalk they were permitted to move freely through the event. A few minutes later, however, they were arrested and removed.
The Philadelphia 11 face a maximum penalty of 47 years each in jail.
This kind of law is asinine! What ethnicity are **all** homosexuals? ARGH!!!
You can now be thrown in jail in the US for reading the Bible. Killing someone by knowingly having sex with them when you have AIDS... well, that's not so bad.
I will be moving to a VERY "red" state as soon as possible.
The is a hugh sample group...seriesly.
Any moose been bitten by these "Christian" protesters?
[IT doesnt matter ,he thinks all CHRISTIANS that protest are wrong from the start,he just sayed so.
No, I did not.]
Yes...You do. This entire case is about religious persecution...plain and simple. It is liberal B###Sh#t...forcing the acceptance and lifesyles of the minority.
Ten years ago an anti-abortionist did wrong = all religious protestors are wrong. Freedon of speech is for ALL of us...not just liberals and/or minorities.
What's it going to take? Evidence? I doubt that will overcome your evident anti-Christian bias. You see, it's going to take more than a couple of biased posts from you to convince me that you're an evangelical Christian.
"IT doesnt matter ,he thinks all CHRISTIANS that protest are wrong from the start,he just sayed so.
"
No, he "sayed [sic]" that he wanted more information and that he didn't trust World Net Daily. Reading is fundamental.
Geez. No one learns logic anymore.
No. I've had experience with religious protestors, and know they are not always peaceful. Because of that, I do not assume that they are, even if they claimed to be. WND is not an unbiased source, either, but rather sensationally cries wolf time and again. So until I see some independant confirmation of their story, I reserve judgement.
I watched the video. The arrests were improper. Having just the World Net Daily information, however, did not convince me of that. Now I have more evidence.
Watch the video! They were peaceful!
The damn pink protesters should have been arrested for obstructing a public walkway. Their message was in no way incitement, though the thought police would disagree.
Can't you read? It says there's a video of the event. A link has been posted to the video so that you can view it and "independently confirm" this "biased" WorldNetDaily story. Yet you continue to rant about "bias" and your own (clearly biased) "experience" with "religious protestors."
You've prejudged the case. Until you view the video and articulate objections to the conduct of the protestors based on the video, I'll believe you made your remarks because of your own personal bias towards Christians.
so much for protecting the right of dissenting opinions. . . of Christians.
Anyone who confronts that is indeed brave.
It looks to me like the
The video shows nothing to demonstrate the truth or falsity of the charges of criminal conspiracy, possession of instruments of crime (what instruments?). Obstructing highways is a stretch (was the leader sitting down near the end of the video for this reason? That seems a stretch, but it's the only basis in the video I can see to support that.)Reckless endangerment of another person, ethnic intimidation, riot, failure to disperse, and disorderly conduct probably stem from their failure to leave when the cops ordered them to.
Now, it looks like the gay protesters should also be charged with reckless endangerment of another person, ethnic intimidation, riot, failure to disperse, disorderly conduct and obstructing highways.
But still, what we had here from the Christian protesters is clearly at least failure to disperse and disorderly conduct. When an officer of the peace gives a lawful order to leave somewhere in order to prevent a confrontation, you don't have the option to argue with him. You have to leave. The police have the responsibility of making sure the gay pride parade isn't violent. They were there first, and presumably were there legitimately. The counterprotestors can and should be told to leave, rather than sparking a riot. The right to free speech isn't absolute - it does not give you the right to counter-protest in the face of someone else.
I think it's obvious what happened afterwards. They were in jail, since they were being arrested as the video was ending.
Bibles, I'm guessing.
lol - well, you just keep perpetuating your generalization if it makes you feel better.
Generalization? I backed up my opinion. And, it seemed that things were as I suspected. There was a side of the story WorldNetDaily missed. (As usual.)
"The ethnic intimidation charge stems from Pennsylvania's "hate crimes" law – to which the newest "victim" category of "sexual orientation" was recently added."
I wonder of this includes paedophiles and necrophiliacs.
I guess the city of "brotherly love" has taken on a whole new meaning in the face of these sodomitic stormtroopers and their allies in goverment.
as someone else said - 11 people are not exactly a huge sampling. /out
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.