I am the Owner and Managing Editor of Free Press Publications which is a Registered News Organization with the SJC.
On the morning of March 20, I went to the Palmer District Court to attend and cover a hearing in the case of State v Ian Freeman. Upon arrival, I was told that I could not bring my camera & tripod, to which I responded, “I’m media, yes, I can,” and pulled out the form that was sent to me via email from Erika Gully-Santiago (Deputy Public Information Officer).
The bailiff said that since I did not present him “the original” (something I don’t have, as it was sent electronically) that he would need to have a judge verify the form, and that I would need to wait outside of the building.
After waiting for nearly 45 minutes, I was told I would need to fill out a motion which the judge would need to approve before I would be allowed through the security checkpoint; this time I was allowed to stand between the two sets of doors instead of waiting outside. In total it was almost 1 hour from the time I arrived at the Palmer District Court and the time I was allowed through security.
I have a few questions that I would like answered:
Is this the normal procedure for ALL members of the media, or is this treatment reserved for people who are not members of the big media companies?
As a Registered News Organization, why was I required to fill out a motion to film?
Is a motion required each time I wish to film a trial?
If a motion IS required each time I wish to film a trial, why must I be registered with the SJC?
If a motion is NOT required each time I wish to film a trial, why was one required today?
I anticipate your response with answers to each of the questions I’ve asked.
In Peace, Freedom, Love & Liberty,
Darryl W. Perry
Around 7:15 AM, eight individuals including myself left the Keene Activist Center in Keene, NH in order to make it to Palmer, MA District Court for a 9:00 AM pre-trial hearing for Ian Freeman of Free Talk Live. Four people in the Palmer area also made it to the hearing. Ian was arrested for filming inside of Palmer City Hall during an allegedly public tax sale on October 25, 2012. It was claimed that he was being “disorderly” by filming in the public space.
Upon entering the courthouse, the man operating the security theater (badge #245) asked what Cecelia (of Ladies in Keene) and I were there for, to which I responded, “A hearing.” After further questioning, I noted that it was a pre-trial hearing. Cecelia was told cell phones were not allowed in the courthouse, so she went to return it to the vehicle. Having emptied my pockets before entering the building, I walked through the metal detector and stepped off to the side to wait for my friends. Cecelia and Jay (who runs www.mail-to-jail.com) came through security, but Ian was questioned about why he had a tripod – as that was an indication that he had a camera. Ian shared the notice to record he had filed and convinced the man (badge #245) to hold his equipment at the desk until after the notice was reviewed by the judge; he was let through, without his recording equipment. (more…)
Joseph “Jay” Noone owned a house in Palmer, Massachusetts, or so he thought. Last Summer, the house was seized by the Town of Palmer after Jay failed to pay rent in the form of property tax. Noone holds a land patent on the property and says that he owns no real-estate, which can be taxed, whereas personal property can not be taxed.
On October 25, Palmer held a “public auction” on what they claim to be town owned property. Roughly half a dozen friends and supporters joined Noone outside of the house at 10 am. Jay Noone said, “I’m making people aware this is stolen property.” One supporter, David C. from Keene, NH, held a sign that read, “TAX SALES ARE THEFT!”
Jay, David and the others were told by Palmer PD that there was a “protest area.” During most of the 90 minute open house, the protest area was not occupied.
Around 11:30, Jay and friends went to the Palmer Town Hall to observe the “public auction” of this and other stolen houses. Upon arrival at the Town Hall, signs were spotted that read “POSTED: No video recording at Town Hall.”
Ian Freeman decided that he would record anyways to see what would happen. After we entered the building and asked where the auction was taking place, we were informed that only registered bidders were allowed to attend. Members of the media were barred as well as other members of the public. A Palmer Police Officer instructed Ian that he was not allowed to film. Ian stated that he intended to film and had filmed in that Town Hall previously.
After a brief back and forth in which Ian asked if the Officer was familiar with the Glik decision, Ian was escorted to the Police Department in another part of the building. He was then taken into the booking area on the other side of a Police door.
Shortly after being taken into custody, I heard them say that he was being arrested for “disorderly conduct.”
I immediately asked one of Jay Noone’s freinds if she could send a message to Keene 411 and contact someone in New Hampshire. The news of Ian’s arrest was quickly spread across facebook and via twitter. As Jay’s friend was talking to someone from New Hampshire, Palmer PD told us that we had to leave and go outside into the “protest area.” I replied that I was trying to find out what was happening with my friend who had just been arrested. I was told that he was being booked and would be taken to the court, but that I needed to go outside. As I was walking towards the door, another officer said that I, and the others, needed to go outside. I asked if members of the media could stay inside, and showed him my Press Badge. He responded that everyone that wasn’t registered for the auction needed to go outside into the “protest area.” I asked if he was stifling the free press, and he said “yes.” I complied, as I didn’t want to join my friend in a jail cell.
Around 12:30 we were informed that Ian was being booked and would likely be done in about an hour. Jay Noone said that Court returned from lunch at 2pm and that Ian would likely be arraigned at that time.
We entered the Court around 2:15pm, however no video is available as all cameras, cell phones and other electronic devices are banned from the Court. Ian was initially called before the judge around 2:30 and stated that he would not be taking a plea and would not be using a lawyer. He was released from his handcuffs and shackles and allowed to join the gallery.
Ian was instructed to speak with the Prosecutor and that he would be called back up. Ian was offered a plea deal, which would require him to claim “responsibility” (apparently Massachusetts lingo for “plead guilty”). He stated that he wanted this to go away and that he didn’t want to return to Massachusetts for court. The Judge offered to let Ian pay $50, he asked if he could donate that money to charity, she denied that request and set a court date of December 10.
After leaving court, I took Ian to the Police Station so that he could reclaim his property (cell phone and camera) that was being held as evidence. The Police Chief returned his property to him, only after Ian emailed copies of the audio files from his phone and make copies of the video on his camera. Ian gladly complied in order to reclaim his phone and camera.
Ian must now prepare for yet another trial and return to Palmer, Massachusetts on December 10 to fight this unjust charge of “contempt of cop.”
