Posted by
Saint Michael on Tuesday, April 03, 2007 12:13:37 PM
I don't understand how this guy can make this claim but he won and is getting paid for protesting. Maybe I'll give up my day job. He clearly admits his purpose (Protesting) for being in the park.
Lead plaintiff Ken Hankin, a Boeing worker, said he was pleased the settlement had been reached but added that getting a few thousand dollars seemed paltry compared to the violation of his rights. He spent three days in police custody and wasn't released until the WTO meetings had ended.
"I lost my right to protest the WTO," he said. "That's something I feel very upset about."
He was arrested for protesting (albeit peacefully) in an established "No Protest Zone" and is complaining that he lost his right to protest. All he had to do to avoid getting arrested (and preserve his rights, his choice) was to stay out of the "No Protest" zone. My assumption is the zone was declared off limits so the protesting would not affect citizens out to enjoy the park.
The trial stemmed from the mass arrest of protesters at a downtown park, where they were sitting and singing patriotic anthems. That week, 50,000 demonstrators had swarmed Seattle, overwhelming police and closing down parts of the WTO meeting.
The park was in a "no-protest" zone established by the mayor, but officers made no effort to determine whether the protesters had other legitimate reasons to be there before making the arrests, the jury decided.
If I lived in Seattle and knew my tax dollars were paying for insurance coverage that pays out money to protesters, I would not be happy right now. In fact, I feel very upset that he got a paycheck from the city for protesting.