U.S. v THOMAS AND PICCIOTTO

MR. WOLL: YOUR HONOR, MR. THOMAS WISHES TO ADDRESS THE COURT.

THE COURT: WELL, HE MAY.

DEFENDANT THOMAS: I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS A NUMBER OF POINTS THAT MR. MARCY BROUGHT UP. FIRST, THE INCIDENT WITH THE SIGN THAT CAUGHT ON FIRE.

I HAVE A STATEMENT THAT I WROTE IN RESPONSE TO AN ARTICLE IN THE WASHINGTON TIMES ON THAT, AND I WOULD LIKE TO READ IT. I WILL DELETE THE FIRST TWO PARAGRAPHS, BUT THIS IS ALREADY IN MY MOTION, SO...

"IF YOU CAN'T ATTACK A MAN'S ARGUMENTS, ATTACK THE MAN. THIS IS THE CONCEPT WHICH WOULD APPEAL TO NEO- MACHIAVELLIAN PHILOSOPHERS WHO BEHAVE AS THOUGH THEY BELIEVE THAT MIGHT MAKES RIGHT. SO, IT IS NOT SURPRISING WHEN THE WASHINGTON TIMES ON MARCH 18TH, 1983, PRINTED AN EDITORIAL WHICH DESCRIBED ME VARIOUSLY AS A BUM AND A PITIABLE LUNATIC WHILE DISMISSING MY ARGUMENTS SIMPLY AS CHILDISH GIBBERISH. WHAT DID COME AS SOMETHING OF A SURPRISE WAS THAT THE ARTICLE SEEMS TO IMPLY THAT IT IS THE WASHINGTON TIMES THAT DETERMINES THE POLICY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR. THIS IMPLICATION ARISES FROM AN EARLIER HEADLINE STORY WHICH APPEARED IN THE WASHINGTON TIMES ON MARCH 16TH, STATING THAT 'THE U. S. PARK POLICE DENY THERE ARE ANY NEW CRACKDOWNS.'

"IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT CONCEPCION AND MYSELF AND THE SIGNS HAVE BEEN ON THE WHITE HOUSE SIDEWALK WITHOUT

ENCOUNTERING ANY PROBLEM FROM THE POLICE CONCERNING THE SIGNS FOR NEARLY TWO YEARS, ONE IS LEFT WONDERING WHAT THE MARCH 18 DEFACING-THE-WHITE-HOUSE UPDATE IMPLIES WHEN IT SAYS, 'FRIDAY, THE DAY AFTER OUR EDITORIAL, DEFACING THE WHITE HOUSE, ACT II, WHICH URGED THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR TO BAN ALL BUT HANDHELD SIGNS, THE U. S. PARK POLICE MOVED IN.' WHILE THE AVERAGE PERSON MAY NOT BE SHOCKED TO THINK THAT THE REVEREND MOON MIGHT BE INFLUENCING U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR POLICY, IT IS VERY DISTURBING TO ME THAT THE MESSIAH'S EDITOR HAVE ALREADY APPARENTLY TRIED AND FOUND ME GUILTY OF ARSON AND DESTRUCTION OF GOVERNMENT PROPERTY.

"IT IS NOT EXACTLY CLEAR TO ME WHO IS WRITING THESE EDITORIALS, AS EDITORIALS ARE NEVER SIGNED, BUT THE WRITER IS CERTAIN THAT THOMAS SET HIS WHEELED SHACK AFIRE"-- THE WRITER'S WORDS. "IF THE WRITER WAS PRESENT AND SAW THOMAS SET HIS WHEELED SHACK AFIRE, ONE WONDERS WHY THE WRITER NEGLECTED TO MENTION THAT THE FIRE WAS FIRST DISCOVERED BY ONE OF A BATTERY OF LAWYERS IN THE EMPLOY OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE. OF COURSE, IF THE WRITER SAW THOMAS SET HIS WHEELED SHACK AFIRE, THERE WOULD BE NO REASON FOR HIM TO MENTION THAT CAPTAIN CANFIELD OF THE D. C. POLICE OR LT. MERILLAT OF THE U. S. PARK POLICE AND ANY NUMBER OF LESSER POLICE OFFICIALS WERE ALSO IN POSITIONS WHICH WOULD HAVE ALLOWED THEM TO HAVE SET THOMAS' WHEELED SHACK AFIRE.

"AN OBJECTIVE OBSERVER MIGHT ALSO FIND IT INTERESTING

TO NOTE THAT AT THE TIME HIS WHEELED SHACK WAS SET AFIRE, MR. THOMAS WAS CONFRONTING A LARGE NUMBER OF POLICE OFFICERS FROM VARIOUS AGENCIES AND GOVERNMENT LAWYERS. THIS GROUP WAS INTENT ON FORCING THOMAS TO REMOVE HIS PROTEST SIGNS -- 'THESE STRUCTURES'-- FROM, PRESUMABLY, THE CITY OF WASHINGTON, D. C.

THAT WAS WHEN LT. CANFIELD TOLD ME THAT I HAD TO TAKE THE SIGNS OFF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL PROPERTY AFTER THE SIGNS HAD BEEN REMOVED FROM U. S. PARK PROPERTY AT THE BEHEST OF THE --AT THE DURESS OF THE PARK POLICE. THEY FORCED THE SIGNS OFF THE PARK SERVICE LAND AND ONTO D. C. CORPORATION COUNSEL PROPERTY LAND, AND THEN THE METROPOLITAN POLICE CAME AND FORCED THE SIGNS OFF OF METROPOLITAN PROPERTY.

"IN OTHER WORDS, THE POLICE WANTED THE SIGNS OFF THE SIDEWALK; THOMAS WANTED THE SIGNS ON THE SIDEWALK. IT MAY BE DIFFICULT TO IMAGINE WHY THOMAS WOULD TORCH A PROTEST SIGN WHICH HE HAD GONE TO CONSIDERABLE LENGTHS TO HAVE ON THE WHITE HOUSE SIDEWALK EVERY DAY FOR FOUR MONTHS."

THE COURT: WAIT A SECOND. WHY ARE YOU READING THAT TO ME?

DEFENDANT THOMAS: BECAUSE THERE ARE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES BEHIND ALL THESE THINGS. THESE CHARGES FOR THE FIRE ARE GOING TO BE, ACCORDING TO ELLIE SHEFFIELD, DROPPED. THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT PROVE--

THE COURT: YOU ARE NOT BEFORE ME FOR ANY FIRE. I AM NOT CONCERNED WITH IT.

DEFENDANT THOMAS: BUT THAT IS WHAT MR. MARCY IS TALKING ABOUT. I KNOW WE'RE NOT HERE FOR ANY FIRE. HE TALKS ABOUT THE WHITE HOUSE FENCE, THOSE CHARGES ARE GOING TO BE DROPPED. I DIDN'T ENTER THE WHITE HOUSE. I WAS MERELY TRYING TO ILLUSTRATE THE ABSURDITY OF SAYING THAT PROTEST SIGNS WERE GOING TO HELP SOMEBODY INJURE THE PRESIDENT. YOU CAN CLIMB OVER THE FENCE WITHOUT A SIGN. S0 I CLIMBED TO THE TOP OF THE FENCE, WITH NO INTENTION -- MERELY TO DEMONSTRATE. SOMEONE WHO IS PRESENT IN THE COURTROOM TODAY TOOK PICTURES, BECAUSE THIS COURT HEARD OFFICER -- DEPUTY CHIEF LINDSAY AND SPECIAL AGENT JERRY PARK TESTIFY THAT THE SIGNS HAS BEEN USED TO CLIMB OVER THE FENCE.

I AM TRYING TO TELL PEOPLE SOMETHING, AND PEOPLE ARE JUST TRYING TO SHUT ME UP. AND THESE ARGUMENTS, ALL THE DIFFERENT POINTS -- I DON'T HAVE TO LIST THEM ALL, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, ALSO, FOR THE RECORD, THAT RIGHT NOW, THERE IS A VETERANS VIGIL GOING ON AT THE VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL. THESE PEOPLE HAVE TENTS, THESE PEOPLE HAVE SLEEPING BAGS, I'VE SEEN THEM MYSELF. AND THEY ARE CARRYING ON THE SAME CONDUCT THAT I WAS CARRYING ON, TO A MUCH GREATER DEGREE. THEY HAVE MORE STUFF THAN I HAD.

I JUST HAVE ONE STATEMENT I WOULD LIKE TO READ, A SHORT STATEMENT, AND THAT'S IT.

"DURING THE COURSE OF MY EXISTENCE ON THIS PLANET, IT HAS BEEN MY PRIVILEGE TO APPEAR ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS IN

THE COURTS OF MANKIND. FROM EGYPT TO ISRAEL, ENGLAND TO THE UNITED STATES, I HAVE ENJOYED A UNIQUE EXPERIENCE IN VIEWING THE MACHINIZATIONS OF HUMANITY'S LEGAL SYSTEM, THAT SYSTEM WHICH DICTATES THE MODES OF BEHAVIOR WHICH ARE ACCEPTABLE OR UNACCEPTABLE TO MANKIND'S SOCIAL STRUCTURE. IT IS MY CONSID- ERED OPINION THAT THIS COURT, OUT OF THE SCORES OF COURTS IN WHICH I HAVE FOUGHT TO DEFEND MYSELF, HAS DISPLAYED THE GREATER WISDOM AND HONESTY OF ALL. HOWEVER, THE DECISION OF THE COURT THAT MY DEMONSTRATION ON THE WHITE HOUSE SIDEWALK CONSTITUTES CAMPING SEEMS TO HAVE PLACED IT IN THE POSITION OF HAVING TO MAKE ANOTHER RATHER TOUGH CALL.

"THE COURT MAY DECIDE TO IMPRISON ME, BUT THAT WON'T REALLY SOLVE SOCIETY'S PROBLEM. BECAUSE OF THE URGENCY OF THE ANTI-NUCLEAR CAUSE, THE MOMENT I FINISH ANY PRISON SENTENCE THE COURT MAY IMPOSE, I MUST IMMEDIATELY BEGIN TO MAKE ANOTHER SIGN INTENDED TO DECRY THE INSANITY OF DESTROYING THE EARTH IN THE NAME OF FALSE NUCLEAR SECURITY, WHICH SIGN I MUST PROMPTLY TAKE TO THE WHITE HOUSE SIDEWALK. THIS MUST BE FOLLOWED BY MORE SIGNS, LARGER SIGNS, AND PROBABLY, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CLEAR DELINEATION OF WHAT PRECISELY IS AND IS NOT ALLOWED BY THE LAW, MORE ARRESTS AND, ULTIMATELY, MORE IMPRISONMENT. THESE ACTIONS WILL NOT BE THE RESULT OF ANY DESIRE ON MY PART TO CAUSE TROUBLE, BUT, RATHER, ONLY TO REFLECT MY DUTY TO EXERCISE MY GOD-GIVEN RIGHT TO EXPRESS MY THOUGHTS AS LOUDLY AND EFFECTIVELY AS POSSIBLE.

"ON THE OTHER HAND, THIS COURT IN ITS WISDOM MAY DECIDE TO WORK OUT AN AMICABLE SOLUTION WHICH WOULD ENABLE ME TO LEGALLY CONTINUE MY ROUND-THE-CLOCK VIGIL WHILE STAYING OUT OF JAIL. IN ADDITION TO SAVING THE TAXPAYERS A CONSIDERABLE SUM OF MONEY IN POLICE, COURT AND PRISON FUNDS, THIS COURT WOULD ALSO SAVE SOME FACE FOR THE ARGUMENT THAT AMERICA, HOME OF THE FREE, MIGHT FIND IT NECESSARY TO INCINERATE HUMANITY WITH NUCLEAR WARFARE IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE RIGHT OF AN INDIVIDUAL TO STAND BEFORE THE NATIONAL LEADERS AND QUESTION THEIR POLICIES.

"UNLESS THIS COURT OR SOMEONE IN AUTHORITY IN THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE OR THE PARK POLICE CAN MAKE IT CLEAR TO ME EXACTLY WHAT THE LAW ALLOWS, I'M AFRAID THAT ANY JAIL SENTENCE TODAY WOULD MARK THE BEGINNING OF LIFE IN PRISON ON THE INSTALLMENT PLAN FOR ME. I HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN A VIGIL ON THE WHITE HOUSE SIDEWALK. UNLESS SOME AUTHORITY EXPLAINS T0 ME EXACTLY HOW THIS ACTIVITY SHOULD BE CARRIED OUT IN ORDER TO REMAIN WITHIN THE LAW,IT WOULD SEEM I AM FATED TO REPEATED ARRESTS AND IMPRISONMENT.

"FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT DOES THE 'CASUAL SLEEP' PERMITTED BY LAW REFER TO? DOES IT PERMIT ONE-HOUR NAPS, TWO-HOUR NAPS, HALF-HOUR NAPS, OR WHAT? IS A DEMONSTRATOR PERMITTED TO EAT WHILE CONDUCTING A CONTINUOUS VIGIL? IF SO, HOW LONG MAY HE HOLD A SANDWICH WITHIN THE PARK AREA BEFORE CONSUMING IT? IF IT RAINS OR SNOWS, IS AN INDIVIDUAL PERMITTED TO WEAR RUBBER

BOOTS IN THE COURSE OF THE DEMONSTRATION? IF SO, HOW SOON AFTER REMOVING THE BOOTS FROM HIS FEET MUST HE HAVE THOSE BOOTS OUT OF THE PARK AREA BEFORE THOSE BOOTS BECOME A STORAGE- OF-PROPERTY COMPONENT OF CAMPING?

"MAY A DEMONSTRATOR HAVE LITERATURE WHICH WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED STORED PROPERTY? IF SO, HOW MUCH?

"IS IT LEGAL TO LIE DOWN ON A BLANKET? IF 50, WITHIN WHAT HOURS? WOULD IT BE LEGAL TO LIE DOWN WITH A BLANKET AND RUBBER BOOTS? IF IT RAINS, CAN A DEMONSTRATOR HAVE AN UMBRELLA?

"IT SHOULD ALSO BE CONSIDERED, PERHAPS, WHETHER BY REMOVING ME FROM THE WHITE HOUSE SIDEWALK THROUGH IMPRISONMENT THIS COURT WOULD NOT BE DEPRIVING THE AMERICAN TOURIST OF SOMETHING WHICH HE GREATLY NEEDS: A PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION FOR HIS GOVERNMENT'S NUCLEAR INSANITY. IF I AM IN JAIL, NO LONGER WILL THE POOR, BEMUSED VISITORS TO THE NATION'S CAPITAL BE ABLE TO TRY AND CONVINCE BOTH ME AND THEMSELVES THAT THERMONUCLEAR WEAPONS ARE WHAT PERMIT ME TO SIT ON THE PRESIDENT'S SIDEWALK AND TO QUESTION HIS POLICIES. NO LONGER WILL THEY BE ABLE TO DELUDE THEMSELVES INTO THINKING THAT IF IT WEREN'T FOR THE TRIDENT SUBMARINE, I WOULD BE IN SIBERIA OR AN AMERICAN EQUIVALENT. GOOD-BYE TO THE OLD 'WE MAY HAVE TO DESTROY THE EARTH TO SAVE FREEDOM' ROUTINE.

"WHILE THE DECISION OF THIS COURT SADDENS ME, WHAT SADDENS ME HAS NO RELATION TO ANY PERSONAL INCONVENIENCE THAT

I MAY SUFFER AS A RESULT OF THAT DECISION. WHAT DISTURBS ME IS THAT WHILE THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAS REPEATEDLY IDENTIFIED ME TO THIS COURT AS A PROTESTER OR A DEMONSTRATOR, UNDER WHICH STATUS MY ACTIVITIES ARE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED, SOMEHOW THE HONORABLE MR. MARCY, ROBBINS, AND FRIENDS HAVE SUCCEEDED IN CONVINCING THIS COURT THAT I AM IN REALITY A CAMPER AND, THEREFORE, A CRIMINAL, AND, AS SUCH, LIABLE TO BE THROWN INTO THE CLOSEST THING UNCLE SAM HAS TO A LION'S DEN.

"IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE SOVIET UNION, WHICH ALSO HAS CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS GUARANTEEING AN INDIVIDUAL'S RIGHT TO SPEAK CRITICALLY AND TO PETITION PEACEFULLY, HAS SUCCESSFULLY EMPLOYED REGULATIONS BANNING HOOLIGANISM AND THE USE OF MENTAL INSTITUTIONS TO CIRCUMVENT ITS CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES.

"WITHOUT EVEN ADDRESSING WHAT I AM SAYING, THIS COURT MIGHT BE ABLE TO FIND PSYCHIATRISTS WHO WOULD BE WILLING TO SWEAR THAT THE MANNER IN WHICH I AM SAYING WHAT I AM SAYING IS INSANE AND A POSSIBLE THREAT TO THE SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

"FOR 25 MONTHS I'VE SAT AT l6OO PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE IN EVERY TYPE OF WEATHER, SEEKING REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE AS PROVIDED, IN THEORY, IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND TITLE 42, U.S. CODE, SECTION 1984. FOR OVER TWO YEARS I HAVE WAITED PATIENTLY IN THE SPIRIT OF DIOGENES AND EZEKIEL FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO HEED MY GRIEVANCE. WHILE WAITING, I HAVE

EMPLOYED MY TIME BY COMMUNICATING TO THE GENERAL POPULATION MY UNPOPULAR OPINION THAT THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND THE SOVIET UNION ARE PURELY RELATIVE AND THEREFORE NO ADEQUATE JUSTIFICATION FOR PLUNGlNG THE WORLD INTO A NUCLEAR INFERNO. I HAVE WARNED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT UNLESS THEY ALTER THEIR BEHAVIOR, THEY WILL SUFFER THE FATE OF BABYLON IN THE 18TH CHAPTER OF REVELATIONS. I HAVE ACTED IN THE SPIRIT OF A WARRIOR WHO RUNS MANY MILES IN THE SERVICE OF HIS PEOPLE TO DELIVER A MESSAGE OF BAD TIDINGS. HE DOES NOT RUN TO DISTRESS HIS PEOPLE WITH HIS MESSAGE, BUT, RATHER, THAT THE PEOPLE MIGHT USE HIS MESSAGE FOR THEIR OWN SALVATION. FOR HIS DEDICATED SERVICE, THE WARRIOR RUNS THE RISK OF LOSING HIS HEAD AS THE BEARER OF A TRUTHFUL BUT UNFLATTERING MESSAGE.

"IN CONCLUSION, WHILE THIS COURT HAS WON A CERTAIN RESPECT FROM ME AS THE WISEST AND MOST HONEST COURT IN MY EXPERIENCE, IT WOULD CERTAINLY SEEM A SORRY COMMENTARY ON THE HUMAN LEGAL SYSTEM IF THE BEST OF COURTS CAN'T ACCURATELY DETERMINE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SINCERE COMMUNICATOR OF IDEAS AND A CAMPER.

"ON THE BASIS OF THE EVIDENCE AND IN THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW, I RESPECTFULLY ASK THIS COURT TO RECONSIDER.

MR. WOLL: YOUR HONOR, MS. WINNIE GALLANT, YOUR HONOR, HAD TESTIFIED BEFORE YOUR HONOR, I THINK IN THE CAMPING CASE. SHE ASKED THE COURT IF SHE WOULD BE ABLE TO GIVE A BRIEF STATEMENT TO THE COURT BEFORE YOU IMPOSE SENTENCE.

THE COURT: I DON'T THINK SO. ANYTHING ELSE?

MR. WOLL: YOUR HONOR, JUST IN CONCLUSION, I FEEL THAT THIS MAN IS ACTING -- TRYING TO ACT IN GOOD FAITH. HE IS NOT OUT TO GET ARRESTED --

THE COURT: YOU ARE REPEATING YOURSELF. YOU TOLD THAT, AND YOU TOLD ME THAT TIME AND TIME AGAIN.

MR. WOLL: VERY WELL, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: AND I AM NOT IN ENTIRE DISAGREEMENT WITH YOU, BUT I THINK THAT IT IS A REGULATION THAT HE HAS VIOLATED.

MR. WOLL: BUT I THINK ANOTHER POINT THAT YOUR HONOR MADE IS WELL TAKEN: THE POLICE ARE OUT THERE; IF HE VIOLATES THE LAW, HE WILL GET ARRESTED.

THE COURT: ANYTHING ELSE?

MR. WOLL: NO, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: IMPOSITION OF SENTENCE IN YOUR CASE IS SUSPENDED. YOU ARE PLACED ON PROBATION FOR ONE YEAR. YOU ENGAGE IN THE SAME CONDUCT, THE COURT IS GOING TO PUT YOU IN JAIL.

MR. WOLL: YOUR HONOR, IS THAT UNSUPERVISED PROBATION?

THE COURT: YES. THE PARK POLICE ARE OUT THERE. THEY ARE BETTER SUPERVISORS THAN THE PROBATION OFFICERS.

MR. WOLL: I AGREE. THANK YOU..

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

MR. MARCY: IS THAT IN BOTH CASES, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YES.

MR. MARCY: TO RUN CONCURRENTLY OR CONSECUTIVELY?

THE COURT: CONCURRENTLY.

(WHEREUPON, AT 10:15 A.M., THE ABOVE-ENTITLED MATTERS WERE CONCLUDED.)

CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER

I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING IS THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF THE PROCEEDINGS IT THE ABOVE-ENTITLED MATTERS, AND THAT IT IS COMPLETE AND ACCURATE, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND ABILITY.

GORDON A. SLODYSKO
OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

Case Listing --- Proposition One ---- Peace Park