Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt (AT THE MALL)

reuters ^ | 3/4/2003 | reuters

[TLBSHOW]

Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt

— NEW YORK (Reuters) - A lawyer was arrested late Monday and charged with trespassing at a public mall in the state of New York after refusing to take off a T-shirt advocating peace that he had just purchased at the mall.

According to the criminal complaint filed on Monday, Stephen Downs was wearing a T-shirt bearing the words "Give Peace A Chance" that he had just purchased from a vendor inside the Crossgates Mall in Guilderland, New York, near Albany.

"I was in the food court with my son when I was confronted by two security guards and ordered to either take off the T-shirt or leave the mall," said Downs.

When Downs refused the security officers' orders, police from the town of Guilderland were called and he was arrested and taken away in handcuffs, charged with trespassing "in that he knowingly enter(ed) or remain(ed) unlawfully upon premises," the complaint read.

Downs said police tried to convince him he was wrong in his actions by refusing to remove the T-shirt because the mall "was like a private house and that I was acting poorly.

"I told them the analogy was not good and I was then hauled off to night court where I was arraigned after pleading not guilty and released on my own recognizance," Downs told Reuters in a telephone interview.

Downs is the director of the Albany Office of the state Commission on Judicial Conduct, which investigates complaints of misconduct against judges and can admonish, censure or remove judges found to have engaged in misconduct.

Calls to the Guilderland police and district attorney, Anthony Cardona and to officials at the mall were not returned for comment.

Downs is due back in court for a hearing on March 17.

He could face up to a year in prison if convicted.

[cinFLA]

No, you're wrong. Certain places of "public accomodation" may not refuse entry by people on spurious grounds.

They did not refuse him entrance. Only that he wear appropriate attire.

[Roscoe]

They asked him to leave, he refused.

Guilty, next case.

[Bella_Bru]

See Illbay's 60. Would you say the same if someone got tossed for wearing a shirt that said, "I support our President"? I am not assuming you are a hypocrute, just asking.

[Jhoffa_]

Private property is private property. No?

Retail establishments and other places of "public accomidation" lose some of their property right's as a result.

I'm not saying that's fair, but that's the law and I used to manage a chain of retail stores.. Believe me, it's not "private property" in any sense of the word.

[Illbay]

Why are you trying to introduce civil rights laws into this discussion. There was no indication by anyone that a persons civil rights were violated.

I see it as PURELY a civil rights issue. If it is not, then the whole "lunch counter" thing back in the 60s was just a figment of my imagination.

You are either unaware of the proper application of the law or you are intentionally throwing out a red herring to confuse the issue. In any case, it's pointless to debate you.

It may well be that I am unaware of the proper application of the law. This is not my area of expertise, after all.

But I am not the only one who thinks the Mall just bought a peck o' trouble.

[Cvengr]

Good followup. In the endtimes there will be those who call "Peace, Peace,...but mean War, war,...." .

The first impression I had, was Dad with his 7-year old kid minding their own business, eating an ice cream cone, having just bout a shirt from a T-shirt shop that happened to say "Peace".

Instead we have a 61 yr old lawyer abd his 30 yr old son, buying T-shirts and customizing them so they read similar to those worn by a protest group which was thrown out to avoid a riot several weeks earlier.

Yeppers, it's a lawyer baiting and contriving an argument to hopefully garner a settlement and make a few bucks on the side or at least gain public attention for his personal political agenda.

[weegee]

How many times have we read complaints here on FR, about bookstore clerks refusing to display or sell books by prominent conservatives such as Ann Coulter? Let's not be hypocrites.

Bookstore clerks do not do the book buying for the stores. When the book buyer orders a book and a manager tells and employee to shelve the book, the employee (clerk) is not doing right by "protesting" the store's decision to stock the book by filing it in the wrong section or shelving it backside out.

If a bookstore owner chooses not to stock a book by a conservative author or even refuses to special order it for a customer, that is the store owner's right. There is no guarantee that the store owner will stock a book just because it is published.

The employees that hound customers for requesting/purchasing books aren't the owners. They are just snooty retail clerks.

The mall may not be able to prohibit the t-shirt shop from selling this bootleg (Give Peace A Chance was a slogan taken from a protected John Lennon song lyric) but there are probably restrictions in their contract on the nature of acceptable window displays. There are t-shirt shops that sell shirts with foul language on them. Would the mall be permitted to restrict the wearing of said shirt on the premises while still allowing the sale of said shirt?

There are stores that sell fancy underwear too yet that is not acceptable mall attire.

[Bella_Bru]

oops...hypocrite, not hypocrute. Dang fingers.

[Revolting cat!]

This is so good, I'm surprised to be the only one to notice this aspect. Peace Movement as consumerism! Only in the richest land on the planet of spoil babies crying for attention, and by gosh, getting plenty of it! Forget Tiananmen Square and a lone student facing a column of tanks! Our TiananmenSquare is the local mall where we'll go to consume: have an overpriced custom T-shirt made, buy a DVD of a violent movie, order a Big Mac with large fries, check out the girls, do some window shopping. Sacrificing for peace!

[cinFLA]

The guy was part of a peace protest group thrown out of the mall the previous week. He was making a stealth attack.

[Bella_Bru]

Yes, I just did. Nice work. :-)

[Illbay]

Sorry, but again you seem to be behind the times.

The principles of the Constitution have long been found to extend beyond the strictures of the specific wording.

For example, the Bill of Rights applies to the states as well, and to local jurisdictions.

Further, the outcome of the civil rights struggle of the 50s and 60s extended them even further, into the private sector (hence the famous "lunch counter" controversy, Fair Housing Act, etc.)

I am the first to admit that it's a double-edged sword, but you can't wish it away. It's been with us for some time.

[cinFLA]

I'm willing to bet that he got into some kind of heated argument with another patron and they were both asked to leave.

The rest of the story says a group had T-shirts specially made and stage a protest in the mall and were thrown out the previous week. Apparently, he was staging a stealth attack on the mall.

[Roscoe]

I see it as PURELY a civil rights issue.

Then produce the applicable civil rights law.

[cinFLA]

Protesting is one thing. The simple act of wearing a T-shirt is another

One and the same in this case. He was part of a group that had the t-shirts specially made for a protest and were thrown out of the mall the previous week.

[Calpernia]

Oh YEAH! He is definately staging something. I got nothing on him in search engines.

[CharacterCounts]

Okay. let's go over the staute posted at 103: "Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Commonwealth, Possession or District to the deprivation of any rights, privilidges or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains,or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section, or if such acts include the use of a dangerous weapon, explosives or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempot to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or may be sentenced to death."

Now, if the mall called the police and had him arrested on accont of his race, it would be in deep doo doo. Nothing in the article even hints that race is involved so the section of the code is irrellevant.

That is the law. This guy has not a leg to stand on. And, or the other poster, my opinion would be the same if the t-shirt said God bless America... I support the Presiden and Free republic.

[Illbay]

The only thing that might "save the day" is if, for example, these people were already "personnae non gratiae". This is possible if they had caused disturbances at the mall previously, and were asked not to come back.

[Hildy]

This has GOT TO be a planted story. Have you noticed how the debate has gone from "should we go to war" to "how come we can't dissent anymore?" They're losing on the war front, so they're trying to get us where it hurts. This whole story is very fishy.

[smalltown]

Forcing you to sell is slightly different than the larger trespassing and false arrest issues in play in this case; but, while I can't quote statutes to you, if you were a licensed retailer operating from a storefront open to the public, it would probably start with a court order, progress to a civil fine, and end with a little jail time.

The problem for the mall and possibly the police is that they have stepped on the First Amendment to the Constitution. Personally, I want to be sure that when Hillary gets elected in 2008, I can wear my "Impeach Clinton" t-shirt wherever I please.