Transcript 1/28/88

MR. JOSEPH: in looking over the material, it says my mother doesn't understand what I'm doing, and I believe she does.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. JOSEPH: I went to visit my mother Christmas.

THE COURT: Pull up the microphone, sir. you went to visit your mother at Christnas.

MR. JOSEPH: I went to visit her at Christmas.

THE COURT: Yes, sir.

MR. JOSEPH: She may not fully understand what I'm doing, but I believe she does. She even wrote me a poem to tell me she understood. I don't really mind anything in

48

here. There's been mistakes on the presentencing, and they were my fault, on things of education, different things. They were all my fault. I believe they've all been corrected. The only thing really is, is my mother. I'm very close to my mother.

THE COURT: You what?

MR. JOSEPH: I'm very close to my mother.

THE COURT: Pull the microphone up just a little bit,

MR. JOSEPH: I'm very close to my mother, and I really don't like to say my mother doesn't understand. It probably doesn't matter. It's not material. I have (pause), I believe that, at the very end of the report, I believe it says that he has shown no concern to change his behavior or to go within the guidelines. I'm not sure what the wording is, to go within the guidelines of the law, and before I was allowed to review the presentence report, application for written permit to do that in doing was done by me, a permit to do it in front of the white House. It says that, under 25 people, I don't need a permit, but I went away and got the permit anyway, just because I wish to try and comply with the Law.

It says that I show no wish to change ny behavior. I applied for this before I even saw the presentencing. I think, if nothing else, I showed I tried to comply within the

49

guidelines of the law, As Mrs. Thomas said, it's just a definition of camping and sleeping. The permit was granted to me, which allows involuntarily to sleep intermittent and to use a sleeping bag, and what I understand the law is, that, for under 25, you don't need the permit, and I have all these rights anyway. I have all of these rights without a permit, because my demonstration is under 25 people, but I went ahead just for the court to give this.

So I think I have tried to I don't wish to break any laws. I have tried to change what I guess you would call illicit behavior by even going and taking an extra step that is not even needed, as I understand your laws, which is to get a written permit. Two probationary periods have been served and not deterrent. One was for DUI in Texas. I have not had one since then. It seems to have been deterred, The other one was for failure to appear for probation, and I've never had another one. So, to say that the two probationy periods was not a deterrent is false, because, unless I was charged with it again, let alone convicted, it Shows they were both deterrent, and it was the recommendation of the Presentencing Department that two probationary periods were not deterrents. I think factually the record will show it was, because I wasn't charged with them again. So I think that's a little biased in that regard. That and the fact that of my mother. That's it.

50

THE COURT: All right, thank you. The government, stay up here. Does the government have anything to say?

MR. DuBESTER: Your Honor I only would like to make a few brief points. I think it's fair to say that Mr. Joseph is more of a follower than a ringleader, to the extent that there is some joint activity going on, but there is also reason to feel that he's not particularly candid and some of his representations may not be the most accurate. He does have a history of theft or bad check related offenses in Texas, which we would submit bear on his honesty. This is corroborated in effect by the misrepresentations he made to the probation officers regarding, for example, his educational background and his history of growing up in Texas.

Mr. Joseph tries to take credit for seeking the permit and going through this process that the other defendants went through. Weil, this is clearly inferable as an idea that he picked up from the other defendants. It strains belief to believe that Mr. Joseph coincidentally can upon his own idea of trying to generate this additional record for sentencing. It's clearly something that he has picked up as a follower of the Thomases.

THE COURT: Excuse me (off record with clerk).

51

You may proceed. Proceed.

MR. DuBESTER: In short Your Honor, it appears that Mr. Joseph is in some ways a little bit of a drifter. He's stiil a young man. He came from Texas. He feel it's inferable in light of how he's before you that he's fallen into a pattern which I think, is tough for many people, enduring what the vigil entails, but in a way is an easy course for him since it does not involve any other challenge or attempt to make something of himself. We would feel that a strong message should be sent to Mr. Joseph that it is time to grow up and make himself, of himself a more productive and responsible member of the community.

THE COURT: Very well. Do you have anything you want to say in response, Mr. Joseph?

MR. JOSEPH: Yeah, like the history of bad checks or anything, I paid for any checks that I ever wrote, paid for any bad checks that I wrote. There were only three checks and the counts are there. Early on in times of my life, I marked the same, as Mrs. Thomas does, a large change in my life in the last year and a half. Things from maybe my past, a year and a half ago, sometimes I think they're not people's business, because I consider what I've gone through a large revelation. Having no direction and just a drifter and somewhere to be, I think is, is rather false, and I'm very strong in what I believe in. I don't put it in legal

52

language, and that is why I do follow Thomas's motion or Thomas's lawyer. It's not my job to do that. I have much faith in God, and whatever occurs, occurs, and what I do what I do wherever I go, which is to spread the word, and if sentencing brings me into jail, it doesn't.matter; It's just God's will, because I do whatever I do wherever I go, and I do have a job, and my job will never change. My job stays the same, and I think, and I can never be fired, so whatever happens here doesn't really matter. I do what I do wherever I go.

THE COURT: All right Mr. Joseph, you may be seated right there across from Mr. Thomas.

Call the next case Mr. Clerk.

THE CLERK: Criminal 87-0061, United States of America vs. Stephen Semple, or Mr. Sunrise. For the government, Mark DuBester, For the defendant, Eona Asiner, Mr. Sunrise.

THE COURT: Mr. Sempler Sunrise.

THE CLERK: Please raise your right hand, sir.

MR. SEMPLE: I always tell the truth the best I can.

THE COURT: Is your answer "yes"?

MR. SEMPLE: Yes, sir, I affirm.

THE COURT: All right. Ms. Asiner, do you have anything you wish to say before the court imposes sentence?

MS. ASINER: I do, Your Honor, and I discussed that with Sunrise, and he has asked that he alone be allowed to address the court on his behalf.

THE COURT: All right. Is there anything, Ms Asiner, in the presentence investigation report regarding your client, material to sentencing, which is claimed to be inaccurate?

MS. ASINER: Well, in my judgment, no, however in

53

Sunrise's judgment, they are material things.

THE COURT: What are they?

MS. ASINER: And he has typed up the document with them all spelled out, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Very well. Mr. Semple you may proceed.

MR. SEMPLE: I don't have a copy of the presentence report.

THE COURT: Have you read it?

MR. SEMPLE: Yeah.

THE COURT: When did you read it?

MR. SEMPLE: I read it twice, I think last week.

THE COURT: You read it twice?

MR. SEMPLE: (Nodding head affirmatlvely)

THE COURT: All right, furnish him with a copy, Mr. Probation Officer. And, of course, I'm going to ask you in what respect it is inaccurate, insofar as any portion thereof is material to sentencing.

MR. SEMPLE: Well, I would say in general that it's a

54

misrepresentation of me as an individual.

THE COURT: All rignt, Mr. Hunter let him see it. In what respect is it inaccurate or materially inaccurate that is material to sentencing?

MR. SEMPLE: Okay, on the first page, there's an error as far as sentence by Judge Oberdorfer on the same charges,

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. SEMPLE: number two of the probation conditions, it's on the front page there.

THE COURT: Page what?

MR. SEMPLE: It's just like on the front page. I don't know if you have a copy the same as this.

THE COURT: Oh, yes.

MR. SEMPLE: Yeah, number two, removed self from park five consecutive hours for sleeping. The judge never said that I should leave for sleeping; he said I could leave for any reason that I chose.

THE COURT: All right. That isn't false, then; that's not really material, is it?

MR. SEMPLE: Well I think everything's rnaterial sir. I think everything is pertinent, necessary.

THE COURT: All right, what else is inaccurate that is material to sentencing?

MR. SEMPLE: Well, I would like to just go toward the

55

recommendations from the Probation Office.

THE COURT: All right, what page? Page 6.

MR. SEMPLE: I guess so.

THE COURT: Do you want to look at it? What page?

MR. SEMPLE: I'm still looking for it, Your Honor.

THE COURT: I don't know what you're talking about.

MR. SEMPLE: What was that?

THE COURT: I don't know where it is that you're referring to.

MR. SEMPLE: Well, there was a recommendation from the Probation Office. Maybe they've changed it. It looks like they have changed it. Have there been changes? (Off record with Probation officer)

THE COURT: Yes, Ms. Asiner, maybe you can help.

MS. ASINER: I think what happened is that Sunrise was mistakenly given the last page that's traditionally not given, and I think that will clear that up.

THE COURT: Thank you.

MR. SEMPLE: Okay. Well, in that case I didn't realize the recommendatlon page shouldn't have been given to me. I guess then I would just like to make one objection that I think is material, pertinent, to what's Going on. I think the recommendation, page 2, yeah, if you would please turn to page 4 of the presentence report.

THE COURT: Yes, sir.

MR. SEMPLE: Recent history

56

THE COURT: Got it

MR. SEMPLE: I would take strong exception to the representation that although defendant, that is a quote from, it looks like, the middle of the first paragraph. Wait. (Pause)

THE COURT: Maybe I'm mistaken, Mr. Semple, but I don't see the word "although" in the

MR. SEMPLE: It's the second paragraph.

THE COURT: All right. You said the first paragraph.

MR. SEMPLE: I'm sorry. Let me see. I think it's the third sentence. It starts with

THE COURT: All right, it says you're often verbally belligerent, and it talks about your unsolicited rhetoric and argumentativeness.

MR. SEMPLE: It says the defendant and his associates.

THE COURT: All right. The court will disregard that in the exercise of its responsibility to impose the fairest, appropriate sentence in this case.

MR. SEMPLE: All right. Also, I take it, I think it's a, that it is said here that I am (pause) let me see if I can flnd this one. There is a sentence in the first paragraph. It says I'm a proponent of world peace and

57

antinuclear proliferation. I've met with Mr. Gunter several times, many times, and I have distinguished very clearly that I do not, that I have strong objection to the idea of world peace as opposed to peace on earth, good will to men. I think this is the basis of this society. I think this shows that Mr. Hunter has not been maybe listening to me enough to attempt to understand.

THE COURT: Are you taiking about Henry H. Hunter?

MR. SEMPLE: That's right.

THE COURT: Mr. Arnold Hunter.

MR. SEMPLE: Henry Hunter.

THE COURT: All right. That's a philosophical difference, isn't it?

MR. SEMPLE: Yes.

THE COURT: But that's not a material difference here.

MR. SEMPLE: However, Mr. Henry Hunter has cast doubt on my sanity and my honesty, my beliefs, maybe, and I believe that that's a very important issue for the court, because I take a lot of time and spend a lot of time and energy trying to be as clear as I can and come to an understanding with Mr Hunter, as well as the court, as well as everyone else, what I'm involved with, and I think that's one of the basic problems, is that we don't follow through on our reasoning processes, which I hope will be done here in this court.

THE COURT: All right, Mr. Semple, anything else?

MR. SEMPLE: No.

THE COURT: Everything else, other than what you told me, is true and correct that is material to sentencing in the presentence investigation report, I take it,

MR. SEMPLE: Excuse me, sir? , Oh, no, not true and

58

correct, I would not say.

THE COURT: That is, insofar as

MR. SEMPLE: As material, true, yes.

THE COURT: Yes. Is your answer "yes"?

MR. SEMPLE: That's a difficult question, sir.

THE COURT: Well, sir, I want to know what it is that you claim to be inaccurate in the presentence investigation report that is material to sentencing. You stand guilty before the bar of this court today, sir. You tell me what it is that's in this report that's inaccurate that is material to sentencing.

MR. SEMPLE: Sir, this report is a misrepresentation.

THE COURT: In what respect?

MR. SEMPLE: Of me.

THE COURT: Be precise.

59

MR. SEMPLE: In just about every respect

THE COURT: All right.

MR. SEMPLE: or the report.

THE COURT: Let me ask you

MR. SEMPLE: Therefore, I leave it

THE COURT: Mr. Semple, you are 26 years of age, aren't you?

MR. SEMPLE: That's right.

THE COURT: You had two years of college, didn't you'

MR. SEMPLE: That's right.

THE COURT: You were found guilty by this court of violating the regulations of the National Park Service or the Department of Interior, were you not?

MR. SEMPLE: It's unclear to me. Now, I mean, yes that is true; however

THE COURT: Let me ask you this: You had a conviction, did you not, in Fairfax County Circuit Court, in 1975, for 3 DWI, did you not?

MR. SEMPLE: Yes, that's true.

THE COURT: All rightt and have you been previously convicted and given probation for camping in Lafayette Park by this court?

MR. SEMPLE: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. SEMPLE: Twice.

THE COURT: And you have not been sentenced in all cases for which you have been found guilty for vioiating the park regulations in Lafayette Park.

MR. SEMPLE: Sentenced as far as I've been put on

60

probation. I don't know if that's considered sentence.

THE COURT: That is a sentence. Are there any convictions or citations or arrests for which you have not been sentenced yet?

MR. SEMPLE: No, I don't believe so.

THE COURT: All right and you play a guitar, do you not, out in Lafayette Park?

MR. SEMPLE: I play it in other places, too.

THE COURT: All right, and have you a five foot peace sign there?

MR. SEMPLE: No, four foot by four foot.

THE COURT: Oh, four foot.

MR. SEMPLE: Five foot by five foot would be breaking regulation.

THE COURT: All right, yours is

MR. SEMPLE: Four feet by six.

THE COURT: All right, and you claim to advocate in your demonstration there in the park, or whatever you do there, to be advocating nonviolence?

MR. SEMPLE: That's correct, sir.

THE COURT: And you further claim that what you're doing in the park is based on your biblical, religiously held beliefs.

MR. SEMPLE: Yes, sir. Not only biblical; I would add moral and (pause)

61

THE COURT: Well, you once claimed it was based on your sincerely held religious belief in God, That was the basis for this court's granting the motion.

MR. SEMPLE: That's right.

THE COURT: Is that still true?

MR. SEMPLE: That's still true.

THE COURT: All right, and I understand you've taken a vow of poverty.

MR. SEMPLE: That's right.

THE COURT: You don't work for money when you do work.

MR. SEMPLE: That's correct.

THE COURT: What money that you do have is given to you for your own good deeds and not because of your work; is that true?

MR. SEMPLE: That's a misrepresentation.

THE COURT: All right that's false. All right, the court will disregard that, then.

MR. SEMPLE: I don't do what I do for money; I do it because I believe it's right.