These are detailed court notes compiled so kindly from some observant friends. This should give you some idea of what the trial was like.
Trial Days 1 and 2
Day 1: Jury selection – August 3rd, 2009
The jury is asked the standard questions, such as if they had ever been subject of a crime and if any if their friends or relatives work in law enforcement or for the court. They are also asked if they had followed the RNC (everyone had), and if they had opinions on how the police or protestors behaved. Several did, but the all-white jury is selected without incident and the trial is to begin the following day.
Day 2: State of Minnesota and Ramsey County vs. Jesse James Forrey — August 4
The courtroom is filled with supporters (40-45 strong), as well as full time anarchist surveillance expert Sgt. Jay Maher, who looked outnumbered and miserable.
Trial begins at exactly 2:45, with the jury being sworn in and instructions given to them as to how to approach evidence and witnesses during the trial. They are warned not to “text, tweet, facebook, or socially network” about the case.
Dusterhoft begins his opening statement by reading from the complaint: Jesse James Forrey is being accused of committing criminal damage to property in the 1st degree for smashing the window of the 1st National Bank building on the 1st of September, 2008, causing over $1,000 worth of damage. The prosecutor also states that Jesse James would be considered guilty for aiding and abetting and/or conspiring with another who committed the crime. The crime for which he is being tried for was received as a complaint based on the intentional and non-consensual nature of the crime.
September 1st was the first day of the RNC. Brian Nelson was working across from the First National Bank building, saw two individuals approach the building, throw rocks, and smash the windows. Scott Olson saw the same individuals with rocks, winding up. Olson followed them. while Nelson got the cops. Olson lost them, but saw them later, while the police were arresting them, and identified them. Nelson also told the cops what he had seen. Tanya Hemphill, property manager of the First National Bank building, will testify about the building and the damage done to it, as well as the costs. Forrey aided and abetted his co-defendant; they worked together and the damage to the two windows together was over $1000.
Barbara Nimis opening statement: Jesse James is not guilty. He was in St. Paul to participate in a peace march. It was permitted, legitimate, constitutionally protected speech. He did not break any windows or intentionally or knowingly assist anyone in breaking any windows.
First prosecution witness – Brian Nelson, 35, lives in a Minneapolis suburb. Works at Premier Parking as an events manager, He collects tickets, handles money, does customer service, and watches the lot. He was at the parking lot at 4th and Minnesota in St. Paul on September 1st. During the RNC, he saw rioting and the destruction of property, as well as reporters and general people. He got there at 8:30am and saw things happen “almost immediately.” Things ere chaotic; he “didn’t feel safe” and called in a second employee. There was “rioting” in front of him. When asked to define “rioting,” he defined it as breaking things and “protesting in general.” He was able to distinguish reporters and the general public because reporters carried cameras. Rioters traveled in large groups making noise and throwing trash. One person threw a pole through a window. The rioting stopped when the National Guard cordoned off the area, but there were still “regular protesting marches.”
He saw windows broken at noon, “right in front of [him],” by two men in hooded outfits and dark clothing; they smashed the windows with rocks “bigger than their hands,” using “baseball-style” overhand throws, standing 3-6 feet from the sidewalk. One window had a large hole; the other one had a smaller hole and the rock got stuck in the wall. The two individuals were comprised of a shorter man with red hair; the other one was a foot taller. He pointed out Jesse as the taller one. The shorter one threw the rock first – they were next to each other, throwing the rocks seconds apart. Nelson called 911 and spoke to a person on a bike who followed them. He saw the two ~15 minutes later after they had been arrested, after Olson (on the bike) directed him to the convenience store on 5th and Minnesota, half a block away. The cops removed clothing from backpacks, and Nelson identified the clothing from the backpacks. He recognized the individuals from the windows. There was one backpack, with hooded jackets inside. He doesn’t remember if they were wearing backpacks before. They had been wearing hoodies with the strings pulled tight so their hair was covered. Nelson said he saw their faces, and they weren’t different. The hoodies were one black and one black-and-white checkered.
Exhibit 1 – google map of area – bank, parking lot, arrest site
Exhibit 2 – picture of windows, reflection of parking lot across street
exhibit 3 – close up of windows
exhibit 4 –not shown
exhibit 5 – picture of outside of convenience store, backpack open – cops arresting them
Defense cross-examines Nelson: Everything started at 8:30? What were you wearing?
He was wearing a light jacket, because it was jacket weather. It was a busy day at the parking lot; he saw rioting right away in the morning, but didn’t call 911. At 10:30am, he saw a guy throwing a pole through a window, but didn’t call 911 then either. He describes this person as “a guy, wearing clothes, holding a pole.” He wasn’t standing right in front of the window – he was about 100 feet away, but he had a straight view. The men were both wearing dark pants, and the short one had red hair. Neither of them had facial hair. He didn’t see the color of the taller one’s hair. Both of them had rocks.
When he had first observed them, they were walking down Minnesota St. from 4th to 5th. They stopped, turned, and threw the rocks. He called 911 after the glass was broken. He yelled at them, and they took off running. They were wearing hooded sweatshirts with the hoods tied tight with a bow. There was a backpack, he couldn’t tell who was wearing it. Next time he saw them, they were with the cops; he’s not sure if they were cuffed. They were wearing T-shirts with the same pants. He’s not sure of the T-shirt colors – “he wasn’t asked to give descriptions of the after-outfits.”In the prosectuor’s interview with him on 6/9/09, he stated that they had “backpacks,” plural. He told the cops that they were not wearing the same clothing, and then the cops looked through their backpacks.
Dusterhoft asks about the weather. Were people wearing hoods that day? Yes, but it wasn’t because of the weather. They were wearing masks and bandanas, also not because of the weather. Nelson initially saw the men with their hoods up, but identified them to the cops. How sure is he of his identification? 100% sure.
Defense – the shorter one had red hair?yes. She shows a pic of his co-defendant (exhibit 6) – does this man have red hair? No. He has dark hair. Was he allegedly with Forrey? Yes. No further questions.
2nd prosecution witness, Tanya Hemphill – works at First National Bank building, employed by Kushman and Wakefield. She is the general manager for the building. The First National Bank building is a combination of 3 buildings, which covers an entire city block. Anchor Bank and Farmers Credit are the banks that are currently in the building. First National Bank isn’t there anymore, but they kept the name because the building is a St. Paul landmark. She “oversees operations,” including repairs. She had been aware that the RNC was coming to town, and had made preperations; they had hired extra security guards, and bought chains, locks, and playwood. They had “heard that there might be protests.” 9 windows were smashed on 9/1, and another on 9/9. These included 4 bay, 1 transom, 1 plate-glass door, 3 large plate-glass windows. She is shown exhibit 2 – those are two-plate-glass windows, approximately 8 by 9 feet. In that bank of windows, 2 were broken through and the other was “crazed.” This damage happened on 9/1 and they did not give anyone consent to damage the building.
They did have the windows repaired – total costs including the window broken on 9/9 $36,000 for glass replacement and $3500 for clean-up and board-up. These figures weren’t broken down for individual windows. Glass replacement for three windows was $9248 plus board and clean up. The map in exhibit 1 is accurate. The building was insured , but the cost of repair was not submitted to insurance to keep the premiums low. There is a $25,000 deductible on their insurance; all of it was paid by ownership.
Defense cross: with clean-up, $39,900? What does that include? 9 9/1 windows and 9/9 window, another one cracked. The costs were estimated by breaking down by window. They assumed the 9/9 window was RNC-related, but they didn’t know for sure. The incident report from security staff said the incident happened at 1:40pm.
Prosecution re-cross: It happened on 9/1 in St. Paul, in Ramsey County. The windows cost more than $1000 to replace – they were approximately $3K each.
3rd prosecution witness, Scott Olson –Lives in St. Paul – on 9/1 he was riding his bike around, observing the RNC later in the afternoon. He was downtown for a few hours, and left at around 7pm, he thought – he didn’t have a watch. He saw clear streets, marches on various streets with cops blocking them. Lots of commotion. On 4th and Minnesota there was no one on the street, he was just biking around when he saw two men, one in the process of throwing a rock through a window. He saw them walk toward Kellog and followed them. He didn’t see the other throw the rock. He saw the rock – did it hit anything? He doesn’t recall the glass breaking but “could tell the effects.” He described the two men as one taller (5’10” to 6’) with red curly hair, and one 4-5 inches shorter. He followed them because he “didn’t like what he saw – people trashing the city, probably not from around here.” He’s “not a fan of the police but he thought someone should say something.” He saw the cops on Kellog, and pointed the men out to the cops – the cops went behind them and yelled, and then the men took off running. The cops ran after them, and they weren’t happy – the weather was hot. Olson stayed on the corner and didn’t follow. They took a right; Olson coasted along, and waited to see if they’d get caught. Then he saw them get arrested.
The one he saw throw a rock through the window was the taller one. He couldn’t see his face at first, but then he did after the arrest. He points out Jesse James in the courtroom as the taller one. Olson saw him throw the rock, saw the chase, then lost sight of him and didn’t pursue. He saw him later, after he had taken his shirt off. He was looking over his shoulder, wearing the same clothes, sweating from running. He is 100% sure of his identification. The second time he saw him, he watched the cops chase the two, and pointed out that they went into the store. The cops pulled them out of the store, and went through their backpacks. He is sure that the two pulled out of the store were the same individuals he saw.
He never went to a parking lot, never talked to a parking lot attendant, and did not tell him anything that he had seen.
He did take pictures of the windows, and one outside the store. The rock in the picture was embedded, as it had been thrown through the glass and stuck in the wall. He doesn’t know who threw which rock.
Defense cross – He went downtown at 3 or 4ish. On some of the streets, there were no people, and there were lots of protestors on others. He had been on his bike for about an hour when he came to 5th and Minnesota. He “took a few” pictures of people and police lines. He saw the redhead throw the rock, but he didn’t take pictures – the camera was in his pocket. He doesn’t recall if there was anyone else on the street. The two men were wearing black, with long pants, long sleeves, and maybe a hood? He doesn’t remember; there were no hoods on the sidewalk. There is one block from 4th and Minnesota to Kellog; he pedaled one block, and saw the cops, He never spoke to the parking lot attendant, and seems rather confused as to why he keeps being asked about one. He did not talk to anyone after the police.
Jesse James definitely changed or got rid of his long shirt; he isn’t sure about the other man. He didn’t see the face of the person who threw the rock, but he did see their faces across the street. He doesn’t know for a fact that he saw their faces. He did see their faces when they were walking into the store. He doesn’t recall if anyone else was walking down 5th St; he was just looking at the two people. He doesn’t recall hearing a parking lot attendant yell anything, nor did he speak to one. He didn’t go get Mr. Nelson; he doesn’t know where he came from.
Prosecution: Olson did see Jesse James throw the rock, but he didn’t see his face. He felt disgusted and upset when he saw it. He followed them, and he didn’t lose sight of them then. They weren’t running, they were walking. He pointed them out to the cops; he is 100% sure of his identification. They looked back at the cops when they started running. He lost sight of them then until they were with the cops, about 2 minutes later. He is positive that he recognized them despite the fact that they changed their clothes. He saw the cops get them out of the store, and recognized them as the same two he saw previously. He points out Jesse James as one of them.
Defense: Did any other red-haired people dress in black? No? He doesn’t recall if he saw any others in black. Is it possible that they were two other individuals? No, they were the same people. Even though the clothes were different? Yes.
No further questions. Trial ends for the day, to resume tomorrow.
Trial Day 3
State of MN v. Jesse Forrey Day 3, August 5
Prosecution introduces witness #4. Officer David Hutchenson of the Metro Transit Police — walks in carrying two bags. He is sworn in, and Dusterhoft begins questioning him. On September 1, 2008, he was stationed at 6th and Minnesota. Throughout the day he say many parades and lots of protesters. When asked about what a protester was, Hutchenson answered that they’re people who chant and hold signs. Dusterhoft continues, asking what a “non-peaceful protester” is. Hutchenson answers that they throw things into the street.
In the afternoon, he made an arrest between 5th and 6th on Minnesota. Those arrested were Jesse Forrey and his co-defendant. Two individuals had approached him and pointed out some law-breakers. He arrested them outside of a convenience store. They were in a large group of protesters. When he arrested them, they were cooperative and quiet. The two individuals claimed to have saw Jesse and one other person breaking large plate glass windows. He says he knew they were the right people to arrest because the witnesses had pointed them out. Each arrestee had a bag, which Hutchenson looked through briefly to look for contraband but didn’t have a chance to go through them thoroughly.
Exhibit 9 introduced as a backpack found on Jesse’s co-defendant, which contained:
Quarter sheet of paper dealing with RNC – police movements, sector 1-8 (tin can comms collective flyer with list of twitter lists)
hat
hooded sweatshirt
shirts
gloves
water bottle
gas mask
headlamp
The weather that day was in the mid 70s. Hutchenson wore short sleeves.
Exhibit 8 introduced – Forrey’s backpack.
rain jacket with hood
rain pants
pants
inside out polo shirt
brown shirt
2 bandanas
hat
glove
water bottle (metal, filled)
water bottle (plastic, empty)
spray bottle top
Two gas masks
Goggles
Sun glasses
Two face shields
Beanie
Decontamination towelettes
Band-aids
Bioshield (chemical agent wash)
Leatherman multi-tool
Cell phone
Bike map
Twin Cities bike map (with sector numbers written in by hand)
Dusterhoff then shows Exhibit 2, the photo of the window, which Hutchenson identifies. Then he confirms locations on Exhibit 1, the map of downtown. He also confirms the photograph taken outside the convenient store was from when the arrest took place. He said he got their addresses on his cop computer, which were both from Santa Cruz.
Defense Lawyer Nimis cross-examines Hutchenson: Minnesota Street was busy, with lots of people. The two people approached him at the same time; one on a bike, the other on foot. When he arrested the two that were pointed out they were cooperative and not loud. He added that he didn’t find a black and white jacket in either bag. He is showed exhibits 2 and 3, and sees reflections of trucks and vans in the window. He cannot see where the attendant sat.
Dusterhoft redirect: Hutchenson again says the day was chaotic, with lots of people and lots of police. He is shown two photographs (exhibits 2 and 4, and says they were taken around the same time by his partner. The backpack is in one, and he confirms that a white polo shirt with black stripes was found in it. He is asked about peaceful and non-peaceful protesters, and he says they were mixed together throughout the day. Gas masks and bandanas were common.
Nimis asks if peaceful protesters could have in their own bag each respective item in Forrey’s bag. He answers that it is possible for each item. He says it is possible that police officers could have worn gas masks that day. When asked if the two he arrested said anything while in his custody, Hutchenson replied they only spoke once to say that he was ‘evil’ at some point during the ride in the police car, but he couldn’t remember who said it. He has been called names a lot.
Dusterhoft asks if chemical agents were used, and Hutchenson replies that he believes they were used at the capital, but did not personally use them or see them being used.
Nimis asks if chemical agents were used downtown that day, and Hutchenson answers with a single word: “possibly.”
Dusterhoft introduces prosecution witness #5, Thomas Bergren: has been a St. Paul Police officer for 30 years. He has two years of college under his belt, but never got his degree, as it wasn’t required to become a cop back when he joined the force. He has been with the Violent Offenders Task Force with the FBI for the past 8 months. He is a homicide investigator and was on the homicide team for the RNC. He investigated this case on October 2, 2008. He went to First National Bank, saw that the windows were still boarded up, collected some glass, and rocks. Up until that point he had not been to that location. While he was there he talked to the property managers. He was able to identify the windows were the same as in the exhibits.
Exhibit 10, consisting of a box with two rocks and some broken glass.
Nimis begins her cross examination: The rocks, not yet in police custody, were picked up on October 2nd, but Bergren had no idea who had access to them from September 1 until that point. The rocks could easily been chunks of sidewalk.
Dusterhoft asks if the rock was pulled from the wall behind the glass and Bergren affirms this.
The State Rests.
DE-FENSE! DE-FENSE! DE-FENSE!
Nimis introduces Witness #6 — Jesse Forrey’s Co-defendant (Jesse’s co-defendant was called by the Defense. His testimony was seen as corroborating Jesse’s innocence.) He is 20 years old. He lives in Santa Cruz, CA, and traveled to St. Paul in September of 2008. He was interested in the large peace protest that was to take place on September 1st. He was traveling around the country and so was Jesse, who was acting as a nanny for his friend’s child on a tour with a band. He adds that Jesse is a wonderful friend who is caring and compassionate. In the past Jesse’s co-defendant had a few minor incidents with the law. He had a disorderly conduct charge, petty theft, and trespassing (all misdemeanors).
In St. Paul, he was at the State Capital for the planned peace march, where he was given lots literature at the State Capital, which he put into his bag. On the march he was frustrated with the massive and heavily armed police presence and the “free speech cage” which had 10 to 15 foot metal barricade walls. He and Jesse were scared and intimidated. They didn’t have a discussion due to all the noise, but left together. He had seen acts of violence that day, and decided to act as a copycat and commit an act himself. He threw a rock through a window. He saw other people running and yelling, was worried about his own safety, and took off running himself. He changed clothes. Jesse was wearing a backpack, a blue button down, and basketball shorts. He never changed clothes. Less than 5 minutes later, he went into a store. Shortly after two people came in and arrested him. He was cooperative.
Dusterhoft cross examines: Jesse’s co-defendant came to join the peace protest against the war, the current administration’s policies, and the RNC. He went and ended up throwing a rock, which he admitted was not peaceful. He was scared by the police.
He brought a mask to protect himself from chemical agents. He had heard of other major protests, such as in Miami, where police used tear gas and pepper spray on peaceful protesters and large crowds, somewhat indiscriminately.
He planned to meet Jesse and protest the RNC and its policies, not the government as a whole. When he got to St. Paul, he stayed with friends. He and his friends were not a part of the RNC Welcoming Committee and didn’t know what that group was at that time. When Dusterhoff shows him the backpack, he is able to identify most of the items in it as his own. Dusterhoff inquires about the gas mask. It was given to him by a friend in Minneapolis and was intended to be used to protect from tear gas and pepper spray, which he heard has been used against peaceful protesters during large protests in the recent past. One item in the backpack, a small piece of paper, is a flyer for the “Tin Can Collective” it contains Twitter listings for updates on the different “sectors” that the Dusterhoff is insinuating the RNC Welcoming Committee was organizing for people to conduct violent protests in. Jesse’s co-defendant does not remember this piece of paper or where he got it.
Dusterhoff pulls out Jesse’s bag. There is a gas mask and a bike map that are of special interest to him. The bike map has hand written in notes, including the numbers 1 through 7 (of sectors) throughout downtown St. Paul, as well as a note where the State Capital, the EXCEL Center, and an address for what he refers to as the “RNC Welcoming Committee Headquarters.”
Dusterhoff whips out exhibit 10, the box with broken glass and rocks, and asks for it to be identified by the witness and begins a line of questioning. The witness did not see anyone else damaging windows, but he himself has already pled guilty to a Felony for breaking a window. He has known Jesse for six years and has a strong friendship with him. He describes Jesse as a good guy; friendly, loving and compassionate. When asked to describe himself he says he is someone who has had hard times, but has learned from his mistakes and is generally a good guy. They both lived about 2 miles away from each other in Santa Cruz, had plans to meet up in St. Paul for the peace march. He is about 1 foot shorter than Jesse, whom he says was wearing a blue and white shirt on September 1, 2008. He has dark brown hair and Jesse has red hair.
After becoming frustrated with the heavy handed police presence at the march, without much thinking, the witness pulled his hood over his head, picked up a rock and threw it at a window. He then ran and Jesse followed him. He never noticed any police following him, but he took off his hooded sweatshirt out of concern for getting caught. After a few minutes he went into a store. He was not trying to hide. While he was in the store he was approached to two men who asked him if he broke a window. He did not talk to them. They were undercover officers, who took him outside and had him arrested. Dusterhoff displays exhibit 5, which the witness recognizes as a photograph of police arresting him and Forrey outside of the store.
Dusterhoff asks the witness if he has lied to protect his friend. He says he wouldn’t lie for his friends, as their friendship is based on trust. When asked again, he reiterates that he did not see Jesse throw a rock and that the other witnesses must have been wrong if they claimed to have seen him.
Defense Attorney Nimis asks why the witness didn’t talk to the police when he was arrested. He responds that every citizen has the constitutional right to speak to their attorney when spoken to by the police, which is what the witness invoked when in the store. The witness has asthma, and was worried about chemical irritants causing an attack at the protest. The gas mask was an extension of that concern. In regard to the Tin Can Collective flyer, he does not remember when he got it and did not have a cell phone on Sep.1st, and he hasn’t seen the backpack or its contents in almost a year.
That morning he and Forrey biked to the Capital. At that point he didn’t know what the ‘Welcoming Committee’ was. He didn’t hear about the protest through that group, but through friends. He was surprised to hear that the witness claimed “the shorter of the two had red hair”. That day there were all kinds of people on the streets, as they were full of people. Short, tall, all shapes and sizes, all hair colors, and he even saw other people that day with red hair. He again insists that we had not and would not lie for Jesse. He has taken responsibility for the crime he has committed because he is an honest person.
Dusterhoff again pushes for any connection to the Welcoming Committee. Was he aware of the group before the RNC? No. Was he trying to help forward their plans for the RNC? No. Was it just a big coincidence about the sector numbers written in on the map? It must have been. Did he know about the RNC Welcoming Committee “Headquarters?” No.
The Defense introduces Witness #7, Jesse Forrey, who waives his fifth amendment rights to not testify in his own trial.
Jesse is 27 years old. He currently lives in Minneapolis, but he considers Santa Cruz as his home. He has been away from home for 11 months due to the bail conditions imposed on him after the RNC protests. He came to Minnesota on the last day of August, on the eve of the RNC, after babysitting for his friend’s child Autumn, on their band tour across the country.
On the morning of September first, he and his co-defendant borrowed bikes and joined the peace march. There he saw a lot of things, and lots of kinds of people. There were also lots of police. And a lot of people running and yelling. The day felt chaotic. He was not sure where he got the map, as he was handed lots of things throughout the day. He had never been to the Welcoming Center.
At the time of the RNC, he was on probation for a Felony in California. He had done his time in jail, and had frequently tried to contact his probation officer to let him know when he was moving or traveling. He tried to contact his PO before leaving on tour with his friend’s band, but as usual, had not heard back from him. When he was arrested in St. Paul, he called his probation officer as soon as he could to let him know. This was one of the first times he ever heard back, when he was made aware that he was in violation of his probation conditions, and would have to deal with those whenever he returned to CA.
Since his arrest, he has been involved in volunteer work but has not been able to have a steady job due to the precarious and constantly changing trial waiting list in St. Paul. He has volunteered with the Community RNC Arestee Support Structure and with Second Foundation doing student aid. He has volunteered his time in Santa Cruz babysitting his friends’ children. He has also taught several Free Skool classes, including classes on Nonviolent Communication, herbal medicine, and healing.
The contents of his backpack on September 1st were intended for the safety and the safety of others. The long clothes were meant to protect from the sun and chemical weapons. The solution (Bioshield) is a skin cleanser intended to stop the effects of pepper spray and tear gas. He had no intention of violating any laws and did not want to go back to jail.
He did not talk to his co-defendant before the window was broken. He did not ask that person to lie for him.
After the window was broken, Jesse did not change his clothes. The clothes in his bag were to change into in case of chemical weapons. He was not wearing a black hooded sweatshirt.
Jesse knows that honesty is hard but it is better. In Santa Cruz he volunteered the fact that he had been convicted of a Felony even though it meant he wouldn’t get an apprenticeship he was applying for. He knows that honesty is important, and that’s why he is pleading not guilty. He could have lied and pled guilty, and would have been home a long time ago if he had. It may not always be easier to tell the truth, but it is the right thing to do.
Dusterhoff begins his cross examination. Forrey came to Minneapolis from Chicago the night before the RNC. He heard about the RNC through the news. He was not intending on joining any plans of the Welcoming Committee or any plans to be in any sectors. He came to see people express their discontent. He and his co-defendant met up at the State Capital. He didn’t take most of the handouts, and he turned down fliers. He did take a map of the city from someone though. He did not know there was anything written on it, and it was coincidental that the map had sector numbers drawn in.
After the window was broken, he was in the street for a short period of time when he ran after his friend. Jesse again reiterated that the supplies in his bag were for the safety of himself and others, and was worried about the police using tear gas. He brought one mask from Santa Cruz.
Dusterhoff asks if Community RNC Arrestee Support Structure is a part of the Welcoming Committee. Jesse says it is not.
Dusterhoff asks Jesse to confirm several points. Was he near the First National Bank? Yes. Was he tall and his friend short? Yes. Did he have red hair and his friend have brown hair? Yes. Did his friend have a hood? Yes. Did they both Run? Yes. Did his friend change appearance after breaking a window? Yes. Were they together when they were arrested? Yes. Did he or his friend call the cop evil? No.
Jesse’s charge in California changed lots of realms of his life. He learned how his actions affect his life. In March of 2006 he was charged with burglary. In that case he confirmed to the police a name that his friend had given, which was not true, so he in turn participated in his friends lie. He was on probation and didn’t get permission to leave California.
Dusterhoff asks about the NVC class and asks if throwing a rock at a window is violent. Jesse replies that he believes that it is a kind of violence. That day he did not see any glass breaking other than the glass his friend broke.
Nimis takes over. Jesse says he saw a lot of people wearing bandanas that day. He saw people of all ages wearing them. There were a lot of people throughout the peace march who wear wearing them. Even legal observers had them. None of the people he saw wearing bandanas were being violent.
The map he got earlier in the day was a free bike map that is given out all over the city. He did not read over the map when it was handed to him.
Defense Attorney Nimis introduces Witness #8, Jason A:
Jason is 41 years old and lives in Santa Cruz, CA. He has a master’s degree in social work and works as a senior manager caregiver for the elderly. He is one of the directors of Free Skool, where Jesse taught several classes. He taught classes on Nonviolent Communication, Herbal health, and singing. He knows about Jesse’s Felony and he knew about the RNC. He shared his experiences with protests and suggested some things to help him stay safe. Jesse wanted to help others and to be prepared to do so. He says that Jesse is a person that takes responsibility for his actions.
Dusterhoff has no questions.
Nimis introduces Witness #9, Celia Kutz:
Celia is 28 years old and lives in Minneapolis, MN. The bike map in Jesse’s bag is the same map that is given out for free all over the city. The hand written numbers would be foreign to anyone who wasn’t from town. There was a lot of literature being handed out that day. There were lots of people wearing bandanas and there was a lot of chemical weapons used on September 1st. She would help anyone, regardless of who they were if they were in need. She currently lives with Jesse, and has known him since January. She works as a neighborhood organizer. On days like September 1, she recommends that people wear gloves to protect their hands from the sun and the heat when riding bikes.
Dusterhoff cross examines: and immediately begins asking about the Welcoming Committee. Celia is a member of the Welcoming Committee, which was a logistical group that was set up to provide support for housing, bikes, food, meeting spaces, health care to help people coming from out of town get their needs met during the protests.
The Welcoming Committee had several points of unity, which Celia cannot recall all of them when asked, but says the group was opposed to racism, oppression, and capitalism. The Welcoming Committee had no plans for September 1st. She sais that the Welcoming Committee suggested to people to wear long clothes to help protect from the sun as well as from chemical weapons.
The “sector” strategy was not devised by the Welcoming Committee, but by other groups from around the country. The Welcoming Committee met weekly in different places throughout Minneapolis. They hosted a Convergence Space, helped distribute food, and provided childcare. The group had no plans to destroy property.
That day Celia did see one window break at Macys. That was the only property destruction she saw all day. She saw a lot of police, and did not see any change in the way the police were acting throughout the day. She recommends people bring gas masks to protests.
Nimis asks if Celia has ever spoken to Jesse about the Welcoming Committee. She has not. The ‘Sector’ idea did not originate from that group. The map with the sectors written in was not in Jesse’s handwriting, which she describes as ‘actually very pretty’ and very distinguishable. She says he is very good with kids and thinks they are important part of any community.
Dusterhoff asks about the Sectors again. Celia says they were not an idea of the Welcoming Committee, and that they did not put out literature with sectors in it.
Nimis asks about the literature that was printed by the Welcoming Committee, which there was a lot of. The Welcoming Center was used by lots of different kinds of people, as well as other groups who were not associated with the Welcoming Committee.
Jesse was someone who takes responsibility on his own accord and is very honest.
Dusterhoff takes over again, and Celia says she is actually suing the Ramsey County Sherriff for loss of materials from when they raided the Welcoming Center. They took a lot of items relating to personal health and safety for the protest during the raid. She was not sure about the other literature that was at the space. She cannot say it was for sure from the Welcoming Committee but is pressured into saying that it “probably” is.
The Defense Rests
Without the Jury in the room, Dusterhoff attempts to introduce more evidence and one more witness dealing with the Welcoming Committee and the raid on the welcoming center.
The defense objects to this because Jesse has nothing to do with the Welcoming Committee and did not posses any of the literature that confiscated in the welcoming center. Also that literature was not even printed by the Welcoming Committee. The only actual connection to the Welcoming Committee was the handwritten numbers on the map referring to sectors that were alleged by the state to be part of the Welcoming Committee’s plan to disrupt the RNC. The defense’s objection is that the evidence and witness would cause unfair prejudice against Jesse.
The judge overruled all objections, though she did have a few pages removed from one pamphlet because they were redundant.
Dusterhoff introduces Witness #10, Ramsey County Sheriff Deputy Jason Anderson.
Anderson has been involved with the investigation related to RNC protest activity since January 2008. Through open sources (the internet mostly), he looked into the Welcoming Committee, whom he said had plans to block off the RNC. He said they were a group of self-proclaimed anarchists, and his job has been to focus on them full time. Ramsey County Sheriffs traveled to the east coast, to Iowa, throughout the Midwest, and to California to identify “key players” and get an idea of numbers. They sent undercover officers and conducted surveillance of planning meetings.
Anderson was present at the raid of 627 Smith Ave. S. This, he claims, was the convergence point that the Welcoming Committee was responsible for.
Dusterhoff introduces exhibit 10, a Tin Can Coms Collective flyer. The Tin Can Collective was set up to coordinate the RNC protests by texting out police movements by sector. St. Paul was divided up into sectors, which were intended to be “adopted” by groups from across the country. Anderson confirms that the numbers on the map that was in Jesse’s bag correspond with the sector numbers.
Dusterhoff introduces exhibit 11, the RNC Welcoming Guide, which lists UA In the Bay as adopting sector 4. This group represents radicals from the San Francisco Bay, Northern California, and Santa Cruz. The Guide also lists several websites, including HYPERLINK “http://www.nornc.org” www.nornc.org, the Welcoming Committee’s website.
Dusterhoff introduces exhibit 12, which was a pamphlet that was confiscated during the Raid on the Welcoming Center by the Sheriff. Anderson refers to this as a “zine” (pronounced zyne). It includes the Welcoming Committee ‘Points of Unity’ as well as their website. In it, there is a map of St. Paul, which includes a list of ‘capitalists,’ one of which, number 5, happens to be the First National Bank.
Nimis cross examines Anderson. There were hundreds of documents seized during the raid on the Welcoming Center. There were many different groups who used the space. Anderson did not know who put the literature there, but says it was distributed by the Welcoming Committee. It included medic literature, peace march information, and was available to everyone, not just protestors. Anderson does not remember whether the warrant was a daytime or nighttime warrant. The raid was at night.
Anderson does not know who publishes the map that was found in Jesse’s bag.
On September 1st, he spent half of the day at the Sheriff Headquarters and half of the day on the streets. He estimated there were 10,000 people there that day. The majority of the streets were not closed off to pedestrians or cars.
Dusterhoff asks if anyone could come in to get the literature from the space. Anderson responds that the police, feds, etc were not welcome in the Welcome Center.
Nimis asks about the map that was in Jesse’s bag again, and Anderson says that it is a general transit map that is available everywhere.
Dusterhoff asks about it too, and Anderson confirms that the sectors written in on the map were hand drawn, not printed.
Nimis has Jesse Forrey take the stand again.
He says he arrived to Minneapolis at around 8pm on the last day of August, the eve of the RNC. He had never been to the convergence space. He did not know about the sectors, and does not know who drew them in. He was not the one who drew them in. He had never heard of the Welcoming Committee before September 1st. When he was in St. Paul, he bumped into some friends from Santa Cruz, but was not with them throughout the day.
Recess until 9AM tomorrow.
Trial Day 4
Day 4: State of MN v. Jesse Forrey, August 6
Closing Statements
Judge Flynn first gives the standard jury instructions for deciding guilt or innocence, and specifies that if they find Jesse to have aided, abetted, conspired or counseled another who committed the crime, then they must find Jesse guilty also.
Prosecuting Attorney Dusterhoff: If Jesse aided or abetted another in breaking a window, then he is guilty. If the damage was over $1,000, then he is guilty of criminal damage to property. The cost to repair the two windows was over $6000. If he did not have consent to damage the window, then he is guilty. He did not have permission of the First National Bank to damage their windows. Dusterhoff reminds the jury about some of the witnesses who claim to have seen Jesse break the window. Brian Nelson the parking lot attendant as well as Scott Olson the bike rider both said they saw him do it. They both confirmed his identity to the police on the scene. They were both able to point out Jesse in court, and they both claimed to be 100 percent sure he was the one.
Jesse’s friend who he was with that day both said Jesse didn’t do it. Dusterhoff encourages the jury to base their decisions on the Judge’s instructions and not “a hunch.”
Dusterhoff brings up the credibility of the witnesses. Do any of the witnesses have interest in the outcome of the case? The people who said they say it happen were just working and watching. They didn’t know each other and had no relationship to each other. Forrey and his friend on the other hand had known each other for years, came from 2000 miles away, and wouldn’t want to see anything bad happen to his friends. Dusterhoff says this is bias.
In terms of the witnesses’ ability to remember facts, both Olson and Nelson said they saw someone with red hair and saw two people throw rocks. Forrey on the other hand, couldn’t even remember where things in his bag came from. Dusterhoff encourages the Jury to take both Forrey and his friend’s criminal histories into account. They were both convicted Felons, and Jesse left California without permission from his Probation Officer. Someone who has committed a Felony has committed the “most serious level of offense.”
Jesse’s co-defendant said he wouldn’t want anything bad to happen to his friend, and wouldn’t lie for him. Forrey had lied to the police before in his case in CA. He even traveled to at least two states without permission. His friend has no phone or address, how could they meet up 2000 miles away?
Dusterhoff claims that the content of their backpacks shows exactly what they were intending on doing that day. Their motive was clear because of the content of their backpacks. He says they came to the Twin Cities with no plan, no place to stay, no information on how to get around, no information on where to meet, no prior knowledge of the RNC Welcoming Committee, and came from 2000 miles away to observe a peace protest. Is Jesse telling the truth? Is he credible? He brought protection that wouldn’t be needed for a peaceful protest.
His friend also came from 2000 miles away to protest peacefully, but decided to throw that notion aside when he became frustrated and decided to copycat what he saw going on. He became violent, and he just so happened to posses the equipment he would need to engage in a violent protest.
The only piece of paper in each of their bags had to do with sectors. The sectors are associated with the Welcoming Committee. The address of the Welcoming Committee “Headquarters”, 627 Smith Ave, was written in on Jesse’s map. Why would they keep only these two pieces of paper out of the hundreds of things being handed out at the capital? Neither had heard of the Welcoming Committee before September 1st, but they were both prepared in the same way that the Welcoming Committee had suggested.
Who is the Welcoming Committee? Their literature has a graphic of a protester who was ‘well equipped’ with a gas mask and gloves. Is that a coincidence?
They at the peace march, saw the police blocking their way, and became frustrated that they could not get to the Santa Cruz sector. They saw the 30 story building with a ‘1’ on top. The Welcoming Committee was opposed to capitalists, and they listed the First National Bank as a capitalist in a map. They just happened to damage a target of the Welcoming Committee. Coincidence? Jesse’s friend claimed to have spontaneously copycat a Welcoming Committee target. Dusterhoff says this is an “Incredible coincidence.” The defendant and his co-defendant’s explanation is unreasonable in light of all of the other evidence. If something is incredible, that means it is not credible.
Nelson’s testimony was reasonable in light of all of the other evidence. Dusterhoff says that if he wanted to prove someone walked across his grass, he could bring in a witness who saw it. That is direct evidence. It would be circumstantial evidence if he saw footprints after someone walked across it.
The backpacks meant they had come prepared. Olson is credible and he ties both direct and circumstantial evidence to the defendant. If Olson and Nelson were credible and saw Jesse do it, and Jesse and his co-defendant were not credible but claim that Jesse didn’t do it, then the defendant is guilty.
Defense Attorney Nimis: Forrey is not guilty. The evidence presented by the prosecution is inconsistent. Two of the witnesses, Olson and Nelson, had contradicting stories. One said they saw him in the street, the other said they were on the sidewalk. One was a half of a block away taking photographs of the protests, but just happened to not take a photograph of anyone committing a crime. One says they talked that day, the other says they never spoke. One saw a window broken with a pole but didn’t call the police. He said he called the police when he claimed to have seen Forrey break a window, but there is no record of a 911 call. These serious inconsistencies are incredible.
Hutchenson said there were lots of people in the streets around the bank. He said it was chaotic and noisy, with 9 windows on that building being broken that day.
Jesse’s co-defendant admitted to breaking a window. Forrey admitted his criminal record. He admitted lying to the police. He admitted to the crime. He admitted he left the state without permission. He called his Parole Officer as soon as he was arrested. He will deal with the consequences upon returning to CA. He has admitted his mistakes. His friendships are based on trust, and would not lie for a friend, and they would not lie for him.
Jesse’s arrangement to meet in Minnesota was in no way ‘incredible.’ People make plans to meet all the time.
Jesse has been active in the Santa Cruz community as well as in Minneapolis, helping raise children, volunteering his time at schools and teaching classes for kids.
Jesse Forrey has taken responsibility for all of his actions in the past and continues to do so currently. He didn’t know his friend was going to break a window, and would have stopped him if he knew. He only ran to follow his friend, and was completely cooperative with the police when he was arrested at the store. He invoked his constitutional right to speak with an attorney. He did not break any windows, did not assist in breaking any windows, and didn’t know about any plans to break any windows. He walked through streets that were open to pedestrians that day.
The map in Jesse’s bag did have numbers written in it, but he had no idea who wrote those marks. There was a lot of literature being handed out at the capital. It is completely reasonable to get a map when someone offered it to him. He needed to know how to get around the city, as he was traveling by bike. The Tin Can Coms flyer mentions food, so why not put that in the bag too?
The warrant for the Welcoming Center resulted in a great many pieces of literature being confiscated. None of those were in Jesse’s bag. The only thing in Jesse’s possession that made any reference whatsoever to the literature that was taken at the raid was Jesse’s map that had hand drawn numbers.
Jesse did not break any windows or assist in breaking any windows. He came to St. Paul to be peaceful and safe. He would have talked his friend out of breaking the window had he known about it.
Prosecuting Attorney Dusterhoff: There are a few inconsistencies in the story because Olson and Nelson never tried to ‘get their stories straight.’ There are some very important similarities though, like they both saw people in a hooded sweatshirt, they were both 100% sure who did it, one person had red hair and one darker hair, and both saw them run. Jesse is not taking responsibility for what is in his bag.
The Jury instructions mention common sense several times. Use it and find him guilty.
Judge Flynn gives some final jury instructions and the jury goes to deliberate.
The jury deliberated for a little over 6 hours, and then announced their verdict of Guilty.
Judge Flynn then set a Sentencing date of September 17 at 1:30pm. and informed Jesse he would need to come in for a sentencing interview.
