reason #9462

i’m sitting around, waiting for kelly & alyssa to come over. kelly is going to cut my hair. finally, my long national nightmare of constantly dipping my hair in my coffee & closing it in doors comes to an end. i’ll try to provide some before & after photos once it’s all said & done. jared & i are leaving for nine days in boston tomorrow & i am overwhelmed by all the work i still have to do to get ready. return library books, get cash, do laundry, pack, try to whip the apartment into shape so we don’t come home to a filthy craphole next week…all while trying to muster up some modicum of enthusiasm for the boston trip. jared is excited to spend xmas with his family. i am excited to…i don’t know. go to the crepe place? i do like crepes, & they’re not so easy to come by in lawrence. there’s a creperie downtown, but it’s also supposedly a mexican restaurant, it’s only open about three hours a day, maybe four days a week, & it always looks abandoned &/or recently firebombed. so i’ve never tried it.

some folks wanted to know what was up with my cryptic “not an anarchist anymore” remark from my last post. i will try to explain: a couple of months ago, i made the mistake of perusing a little anarchist media on the interwebz, & i read an anonymous article called “why the asheville 11 are being demonized & why it matters”. i’m not going to get into all the details because i already wrote a blog post about it months ago. search the archives, especially the “potential controversy” & “political hot topic” tags. the post i wrote was certainly incendiary, but that really shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone who knows me or comprehends my tagline. i’m not nice. get it?

a week or two ago, i noticed a sudden unexplained uptick in traffic flowing to that particular blog post. i also started getting lots of bizarre comments on it. the people who liked it generally wrote something like, “excellent post,” & the people who didn’t like it were somewhat more loquacious, writing things like, “fuck you, you dumb bitch.” the comments were split about 50/50 between the fans & the haters. i didn’t approve any of them, because none of them contributed anything to the conversation, & i was not personally acquainted with anyone who commented. at the end of the day, this is not “huffington post” & i mostly write this thing to amuse myself & the people i know. when strangers stumble across it, that’s just gravy.

i did a little digging online & discovered that some random person had compiled a media round-up of all the asheville 11 commentary happening on the internet. this person included a link to my post, as well as a few quotes. i was used as the example of how the asheville 11 case has factionlized the larger anarchist community. i was portrayed as the representative that is not inclined to bend over backwards to support them with their legal troubles. i’d say this is a fair representation, so, while i was not entirely psyched about being linked to by some randomoid who boosted my taffic, & hence, the number if idiotic comments i have to field, i just let it go.

then, a couple of days later, i got a call from someone i was formerly good friends with but had not spoken to in quite some time. she said that one of the asheville 11 had contacted her to express concern about my blog post. i don’t know why this person didn’t just contact me directly. my e-mail address, home address, & facebook info are all over this blog, or the person could have left a private comment. anyway, this individual supposedly wanted me to “issue a retraction” with regards to my post. despite the fact that i am not a journalist & have never claimed to be a journalist, & despite the fact that this is a personal blog where i express my personal opinions about various issues. i certainly had no interest whatsoever in “retracting” my opinion. apparently the concern was that the prosecuting attorney in the asheville 11 trial might attempt to read my blog post out loud in court, in an effort to prejudice the jury, i guess? i had to laugh a little. word on the street is that the asheville 11 defendants owe their defense attorney(s) thousands of dollars. any lawyer worth those kinds of fees ought to know enough to try to bar the prosecutor from a transparent attempt at turning the jury. my writing on this topic could in no way be considered “evidence”. i think even calling it “hearsay” would be giving it more weight than it really deserves.

i offered to include a clarification with the post, indicating that the whole thing is opinion-based…you know, for all the fucking dumbasses out there who couldn’t tell just by reading it. “i read it on the internet, it must be true!” the person i was speaking with then busted out the big guns & informed me that there was some concern that the prosecutor might subpoena me…not sure to what end. i assume a subpoena in this case would be issued, ideally, to someone who can testify to the fact that they know for a fact that one or more of the defendants actually did any of the things they are accused of in the trial, or perhaps to someone who can testify to the fact that any of the defendants has done things similar to what they are accused of. considering that i have never met, spoken to, or written to any of the defendants, i obviously can’t testify to any of those things. again, i had to laugh. naturally, i would probably start laughing pretty quickly if i actually did get subpoenaed, because jesus eff, what a pain in the ass! but i would still be utterly amused by the evidence that the prosecutor in this case takes anarchists so much more seriously than i, as an actual ex-anarchist, do.

i’m not sure where the whole subpoena claim is coming from. i don’t know if it’s something that one of the asheville 11 defendants told my former friend to pass on to me, or if it’s something my former friend concocted herself. either way, i think it comes from one of two strains of thinking: 1) these people take themselves really, really fucking seriously & seem to have no grasp of how the law actually works, which is just embarrassing in a person who supposedly adheres to or admires an ideology that wants to eradicate the law altogether (i think it’s worth trying to understand what you are opposed to), or 2) they thought this might scare me into “retracting” or deleting the post. either way, i find it disappointing & silly.

okay, kelly is here to give me a haircut. long story short: people are idiots.

3 Comments Add yours

  1. Nicole says:

    But they are special snowflakes and the world revolves around them. Anything YOU say or do will be held against THEM in a court of law.

  2. Drugless says:

    This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard this week, and Christmas was just a few days ago. There is NO chance of you being subpoenaed. You are a commentator, and not a witness. If anything, this is “hearsay of hearsay”, considering that your blog post was referencing media outlets, and not direct testimony of any alleged witnesses. No self-respecting D.A. would have you subpoenaed in such a sophomoric way; they must look competent before the jury, the judge, and the loyal opposition.

    Whoever is talking shit is playing games against critical voices when they should be more worried about how to pay their lawyers. I consider this kind of financial strain through legal costs to be an unacceptable demand for community resources, a mockery of radical politics. People are foreclosed and homeless, sick and uninsured, and we’re supposed to donate to keep your ass out of jail for “fucking shit up”? Thanks for liberating us all from that horribly oppressive plate glass window. Give me a goddamn break.

    Send them this.

    Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 803, Exceptions to hearsay rule.

    1. ciara says:

      totally agreed, dude. i got distracted from finishing this post when kelly & alyssa came over, but i meant to write this whole screed about how the complaints about my post were a really transparent attempt at silencing critique. i am not putting a gun to anyone’s head & forcing them to agree with my critiques, but i am certainly entitled to a basic opinion. i got this one crazy response to my original post (which i did not approve), but basically the dude was like, “all prisoners are political prisoners, & any movement that doesn’t support their prisoners is a SHAM MOVEMENT!” right, a lot of movements that do support their prisoners are also sham movements. what’s your point? he also said that if i walked into his local infoshop spouting off this way, i’d be asked to leave & i’d only be asked once. oh no! kicked out of the local infoshop! anything but that! i was not aware that the average anarchist infoshop was in a stable enough financial position to issue ideological purity tests at the door, but you learn something new everyday.

      basically, it seems that what happened is that one or more of the asheville 11 defendants stumbled across my blog post & this was their first time ever on the internet so they were really shocked that maybe someone was being mean to them online. so they were trying to convince me to edit/delete my post in order to spare them feelings of embarrassment or whatever, by manipulating the anarchist language of justice to their own ends. & they threw in a little legal scare-mongering too in the hopes that i am a fucking dumbass with less understanding of the legal profession than a scriptwriter for “ally mcbeal”. a noble effort…but no.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s