To Prevent a Greater Harm
Necessity Defense to be Argued by Local Anti-War Actvists
Article By – State vs Herrera-Imani Defense Team
On January 26th Pierce County District Court Judge, Margaret Vail Ross, ruled in favor of Civil Rights Attorney Larry Hildes to present a Necessity defense in the joined cases of anti-war activists Brianna Emma Herrera, of Seattle, and Patricia Imani, of Olympia. Jury trial is set for April 21st and 22nd in Pierce County District Court, Tacoma, WA. (The trial was rescheduled soon into the first attempt at trial, in January, when a potential conflict with a juror was presented to the court. Because an alternate juror was not available, Judge Ross made the appropriate decision to call a mistrial and reschedule.)
The January 26th ruling is just the third time in Washington State history that the defense has been allowed by the courts, though many within the anti-nuclear and anti-war movements have sought the defense in civil disobedience cases.
The rationale behind the necessity defense is that in order to prevent a greater harm a technical breach of law (in this case, disorderly conduct) is more advantageous to society than the consequence of strict adherence to the law (in this case, war crimes, crimes against peace and crimes against humanity).
Herrera and Imani were arrested in August 2008 while participating in non-violent civil resistance at separate planned actions near the gates of Fort Lewis, WA. Direct actions through human blockades were taken to delay the refitting and redeployment of combat vehicles used in US occupation of Iraq. The combat vehicles, recently redeployed to Iraq, were with the 4th-2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team based at Fort Lewis.
Direct actions to resist the illegal aggressive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken place since May of 2006 in association with Port Militarization Resistance efforts. As written by Marco Rosairre Rossi in a June 2006 Works in Progress article, A Call for Direct Action Against the War, “Their actions, though technically violations of minor local laws… are fully protected under international law. The Nuremberg Trials clearly laid down the principle that citizens not only have a right, but a duty, to disobey and resist the laws of regimes that ignore international law. The United States government, without any doubt, is such a regime…The actions of the activists who were arrested may not be congruent with local laws, but they are in full compliance with international laws, and in so far as those laws have been ratified by the United States government, they are also in compliance with the US Constitution. If anything, these activists are law-abiding global citizens who are trying to hold accountable the largest organized crime syndicate in the world: the United States government.”
Key defense witnesses for the Herrera-Imani trial will include Daniel Ellsberg, the noted US military analyst employed by the RAND Corporation who was responsible for release of the Pentagon Papers to The New York Times in 1971. The act of releasing the classified documents was technically illegal, but the act of civil resistance turned public sentiment against the Vietnam war, ultimately encouraging an end to the war. Also testifying for the defense will be Seth Manzel, a local Iraq War Veteran. Manzel is founder of the non-profit organization GI Voice and member of Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW).
The State vs Herrera-Imani Defense team is continuing to seek donations in order to cover the basic costs of the trial. If you can help, donations can be made payable to “P.O. LEGAL DEFENSE FUND” and mailed to PO BOX 295, Olympia, WA 98507.
