More Meeting Advice (Winter, 1993-1994) 
---------------------------------------

By The Judicator of D.C.


"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or
of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the government for a redress of grievances."

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State
wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor
shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due
process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws."

These two paragraphs are the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the
Constitution. The First says that as a citizen you have a legal right to
peaceably assemble and the federal government cannot take that right away from
you. It does not say that a State has to allow you to assemble. This was the
case until June 9, 1868. The Fourteenth Amendment applied the Constitution and
its protections to the States. Before this, each individual state could
prohibit the free assembly of persons.

Presently, we can gather on public space and discuss whatever subject comes to
mind. There are exceptions to this, however. You cannot stand on the corner of
Broadway and discuss the violent overthrow of the government. Nor can you
discuss the intimate details of your love life.

So what have we learned? The First and Fourteenth Amendments allow us to gather
for meetings anywhere we want, and no one can stop us. Right? Wrong! The
Constitution applies to governments and is limited in its application of powers
to private industry. For example, in Washington, D.C. there is a law called
Unlawful Entry. It states that any person who willfully remains on any property
after being asked to leave by the rightful owner or person then in charge is
guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to arrest. The constitutionality of this
law has been tested and affirmed. Your local jurisdiction may have a law
similar to this under different names (Criminal Trespass or Trespassing). The
easiest way to find out is to pick up a (pay) phone and call your local police
department. Ask them. Don't be afraid. You cannot get in trouble for being a
concerned citizen.

What is the basis for these laws? Consider this: You own a beautiful piece of
property that overlooks a great seascape. People are using your property for
religious gatherings and artistic inspiration without your permission. If the
Constitution applied to private property you couldn't stop these people. But
since it does not, you can have them removed or arrested, if your local law
allows.

Of the 20 2600 meetings that take place throughout the United States, 13 take
place in malls, five in other private places, and two are unknown to this
writer. Citicorp Center and Amtrak are private institutions. It sounds like the
Galleria on South University and Union Station are also private but I cannot
tell by their names. Malls are almost exclusively privately owned. I cannot
recall seeing a government owned mall lately. Being privately owned, the
rightful owner or the person then in charge can ask you to leave (depending on
your local law). The sad thing is that you will have to follow his directions
and then follow up with a civil suit. What you base that suit on is another
problem. It would not fall under a racial bias, nor a gender bias. If you do
not leave at their request, you leave yourself vulnerable to arrest. What does
this mean to us dedicated 2600ers?

When you are attending a 2600 meeting, be sure to know the law in your area. If
you are hosting a party or attending a party at a mall or on other private
property, be informed. When approached by a security officer, police, or the
management, don t go on blabbering how the First Amendment allows you to gather
any place you like. It doesn't. Instead, do the following:

1. If the area you are meeting in has stores, purchase some merchandise that is
sold in these establishments prior to your meeting. When approached by the
charging person, explain that you have just made purchases from the
establishments. Does he/she really want to throw out a buying customer?

2. Explain to the charging person your intentions of the gathering. Don't
forget these points: You chose this area because of a) its successful
reputation, b) its great location, c) the fine merchants, d) all of the above.
This sounds like a bunch of crap (which it is), but it will strengthen any
court case you bring about in the future.

3. As a last resort, inform them of your research into the local laws and
ordinances of trespassing. If possible, give them a copy of the law. Ask them
to have the police respond. When an officer arrives, explain that this security
officer is unlawfully asking you to leave when you wish to stay. But, if a
police officer asks you to leave, do so! Do not ask for his name and badge
number; you can see that. If you can't, find his car and write down the ID
number. Then call the station he is from and ask to speak to a supervisor.
Inform the supervisor of the squad car number, the description of the officer,
and what happened. Make a written complaint if possible.

You must remember to be calm and rational during these proceedings. If not, you
could be placed under arrest for disorderly conduct or some such. Although not
what you were originally bothered with, the security officer has succeeded in
his task to get rid of you.

2600 meetings are great ideas for the free exchange of ideas and are, in
theory, what this country was founded upon. But, they are not worth getting
arrested for if you are wrong. There are plenty of legal places to hold
meetings. Try a public park or parking area. Call your local seat of government
and ask to use their meeting room. How about that for irony! Using a government
establishment to hold a 2600 meeting! Under the First Amendment, they cannot
deny you. Look at the court record of such groups as the KKK. They meet and
march on any public space they like with the proper permits. 2600ers can do the
same.

In writing this, a few friends have raised valid questions, which I am sure
other 2600ers will ask. What about conspiring to commit a crime? Isn t meeting
to discuss committing crimes illegal? Yes and no.

Conspiracy is defined as an agreement to perform an illegal act. Most states,
in defining the acts that constitute conspiracy, require an overt act. The best
definition would be an example itself. John and Bill are eating dinner while
discussing robbing a bank. They talk about the getaway car, what type of gun to
use, and the best time to commit the robbery. Both finish dinner and go their
separate ways until they meet at work the next day. John tells Bill he bought
the gun and obtained the getaway car. As of this moment, John and Bill can be
arrested for conspiring to commit a bank robbery.

The First Amendment protects our freedom of speech to a degree. If John and
Bill had not done anything else but talk about the bank robbery, no harm could
have come to either of them. Since John purchased the gun and getaway car, he
showed his intentions to follow through with their plan. This was the overt
act. This was what got them into trouble. Both can be arrested, but the case of
innocence for Bill is very strong. It must be proven in court, requiring the
expense of thousands of dollars for an attorney. A court-appointed attorney can
be assigned, depending on financial need, with his/her cost coming out of
taxpayer money.

One can see the parallels of this story to that of 2600 meetings. Yes, 2600ers
gather in places to discuss illegal acts. Are they conspiring to commit these
offenses? Maybe. It depends upon each individual person. Let's say a
conversation was entered dealing with the sale, not possession, of proprietary
information. No one from the discussion group does anything to forward the idea
of the sale. Is this legal? Yes, under the First Amendment. What if one of the
members contacts an underground fence offering the document for sale based on
information he discussed at the meeting? Is this conspiracy? I'm sure Law
Enforcement could substantiate enough evidence to bring about the arrests of
the discussion group, but would they have enough evidence to prove "beyond a
reasonable doubt" their case in court? Maybe not. However, they have succeeded
in harassing the group and costing both the taxpayers and the group members
several thousands of dollars in court and attorney's fees. Do you have any
means of redress? You could try to sue for damages incurred due to the
inconvenience of the arrest, but if the Law Enforcement agency did its job
correctly, you will not win.

I cannot speak for all states but the basis for most laws are the same. As
mentioned earlier, call your local police or the nearest state police office.
You cannot get in trouble for asking. Also ask for examples and a written
reply.

The writer is "heavily involved" with the law enforcement community.