irvine-11 - Law Offices of William W. Bruzzo

Orange County “Irvine 11” Convicted of All Counts

Law Offices of William W. Bruzzo — Wed, 28 Sep 2011 01:47:00 GMT

Last Friday, September 23, 2011, in the Central Justice Center in Santa Ana, 10 UC Irvine students (Irvine 11) were found guilty by a jury (the eleventh Defendant worked out a deal with prosecutors prior to trial). Each was found guilty of one count of disturbing a public meeting and for conspiring to do the same for their actions during Israeli ambassador Michael Oren’s speech at UC Irvine. Prosecutors told the jury that these students attempted to stop Oren’s speech and that it went beyond expressing their disagreement about the speaker’s position. The defense took the opposite stance. They explained that the UC Riverside and Irvine students involved were expressing their freedom of speech and were being targeted for the pro-Palestinian content of their argument. The DA’s office explained that by using a “heckler’s veto” the students had planned to use their disruptions to end the presentation. An e-mail used during the trial revealed a plan on how to disrupt the speech regardless of how officials might react. The DA used the defense argument in reverse: the students were suppressing Oren’s freedom of speech and that is against the law. As far as the Prosecutor was concerned it did not matter what the students were saying during the speech; it was the way they went about it. For the students it was about being targeted for their beliefs and because they are Muslim and had they been anyone else, this would not have happened in their opinion. Their attorneys argued that the students had conducted themselves in a lawful peaceful manner, but in the end the jury did not agree.

Defense Lawyers Want Lid on DA’s Office in Irvine 11 Case

Law Offices of William W. Bruzzo — Mon, 16 May 2011 17:41:00 GMT

Defense attorneys have filed a motion that would limit the public statements given by the District Attorney’s office in regards to the on-going case against 11 UC Irvine students. The motion argues that chief of staff for Orange County District Attorney, Susan Kang Schroeder and Assistant D.A. Dan Wagner have made public statements that were “ethically irresponsible”. It is also argued that Mr. Wagner acted inappropriately by offering his personal opinion that the students were guilty. Ms. Kang Schroeder and Mr. Wagner have both expressed their disagreement with the motion. Later this month the motion will be heard, in addition to another motion requesting that the transcripts from the grand jury investigation be excluded from evidence in the eventual trial. On June 17 a motion to recuse the District Attorney’s office from the case will be heard. All eleven students are charged with one count of conspiracy to disturb a meeting and one count of disturbing a meeting. Both charges are misdemeanors that come with a six months jail sentence, or community service, probation or fines. See, Penal Code Sections 415, 415.5 and 416.

Muslim Student Union Suspended at UC Orange County Campus

Law Offices of William W. Bruzzo — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:34:00 GMT

The University of California at Irvine (UCI) located in Orange County California has suspended a Muslim student group from campus for one year. The basis for the suspension arose from multiple disruptions of a speech given by the Israeli ambassador to the United States by members of the Muslim Student Union (MSU), a Muslim student group from UCI. The speech occurred February of 2010 and a recently completed investigation by the University found that the MSU had planned the disruptions and even planned what each person designated to disrupt would say.

The MSU can still appeal the decision to UCI personnel. Each of the people who disrupted the proceedings was led away by law enforcement. It is unknown whether they were individually charged with criminal acts for the disruptions. Under California Penal Code Section 415 an individual may be charged with disrupting the peace with loud noises. Video of the speech shows Ambassador Oren having to stop because of the disruptions several times and it is reported he abandoned a question and answer session scheduled for the end of the speech as a result of the disruptions.

While individuals may be charged with violations of criminal law for what may be argued is a demonstration of a political point of view, it is less clear that a group can be suspended because some of its members violated the law or conspired to disrupt the proceedings. For example, if members of the Republican Party were to disrupt a town hall meeting held at UCI to discuss health care reform, it is unimaginable that the Republican Party would be suspended from participating in group activities on campus. Similarly, it would seem that the constitutional right to association and the constitutional prohibitions against discrimination based on ethnicity and religion would cause the suspension of the MSU to be an unconstitutional act by a state institution. In constitutional law lingo a suspension in this case would be deemed an ‘overbroad’ remedy and therefore unconstitutional. See, Penal Code Section 415.

Constitutional or Discourteous?

Law Offices of William W. Bruzzo — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 04:04:00 GMT

Last week Michael Oren gave a speech at University of California, Irvine in Orange County, California, describing the issues he faced as Israeli ambassador. His speech was interrupted multiple times from members of the audience that did not agree with him. A video posted online showed the interruptions occurring roughly every ten minutes. Professor Petracca of the Political Science department expresses his impatience with the outbursts and called out “Shame on you!” when he took the podium to control the ruckus caused by the interruptions. He told the audience that this behavior is not appropriate for University of California students. The spirit of the event as explained by Professor Petracca and Chancellor Drake was to provide a forum for an exchange of ideas and discussion on the Middle East situation. They said that a better way for the UCI Muslim Student Union (the group expressing their dissatisfaction with the speaker) to express their disagreement would be by presenting the ambassador with questions at the end of his talk. University officials were likely embarrassed by the students’ conduct. The MSU has put on its share of displays on campus denouncing Israeli occupation and their tactics and the tolls it takes on the Palestinian community. Indubitably the University would have preferred picketing outside the speaking venue. Yet it’s important to remember that a marginalized group may feel that working within the accepted modes of expression is not effective. The outbursts managed to successfully interrupt Oren from talking, but did not communicate any counter point. Some people present complained that UCI should have taken better measures to control the crowd and that the outbursts made UCI look bad. Notably, as soon as a person yelled out they were escorted out of the auditorium. The position that UCI takes on the incident is that expression is permitted within certain limits dictated by place and time. It is unclear if the students will be charged criminally. If they are they can be charged with disturbing the peace under Penal Code section 415 (2); this penal code section prohibits using “loud and unreasonable” noise. Despite the strong protection of Free Speech in the U.S. Constitution it does appear that the manner in which the students sought to protest the ambassador fell outside the protection of the constitution.