An Injury to One Is An Injury to All

.

December 2003    

Stop the Witchhunt, Drop the Charges!

Miguel Malo defense demo, 24.11.03
Union workers have played key role in demonstrations in defense
of Miguel Malo. Above: outside Bronx Criminal Court, 24 November 2003.
(Photo: Sue Kellogg)

Day Two of the Miguel Malo Trial 

We print below a report on the second day of the trial of  Hostos Community College student leader, Miguel Malo, which continued on Tuesday, December 2.

Day Two of the trial of Miguel Malo was devoted to approving witnesses to be called during the testimony, or, more accurately, to denying the defense the right to call several key witnesses that are vital to its case. Judge Robert Torres began the proceedings by accepting a motion by the Hostos College lawyer to quash the subpoena of Hostos president Dolores Fernández, on the grounds that she was allegedly “not personally knowledgeable” about the facts of the case. Defense attorney Ron McGuire had argued forcefully that, under regulations of the City University of New York (CUNY), college presidents were responsible for campus security. “The buck doesn’t stop with the arresting officer, the buck doesn’t stop with the head of security, the buck stops with the president,” said McGuire.

McGuire also stated that he wanted to question Fernández about calls from Hostos officials to Professor Lucinda Hughey on 14 August 2001, the night before the student demonstration at which Miguel Malo was arrested. Professor Hughey, who was at that time chapter chairman of the faculty union, the Professional Staff Congress (PSC), says she was told in the calls that the college president had been deeply “embarrassed” by earlier student protests in May 2001, and that if students went ahead with plans to demonstrate on August 15, the administration would “not take it lying down.” Worried that students would be arrested or hurt, Hughey went to Hostos early the next day to urge them not to protest. 

In line with his outrageous statement that the trial “is not about whether students have a right to voice their opinions” (see Day One of the Miguel Malo Trial), Judge Torres not only quashed the subpoena of Hostos president Fernández, he ruled that “what Professor Hughey did or did not do, and what led her to those conclusions are not relevant to this trial,” and struck her name from the witness list. When the prosecution objected to an eyewitness to the arrests being called for her testimony, the judge issued an edict that “no witness is going to get on the stand and say he [Malo] was not resisting arrest. They will only say what they observed.”

Another witness on the list presented by the defense was Christopher Gunderson, who was the first student arrested on August 15, by the same “peace officer,” José Cruz, whose statements are the heart of the prosecution case against Miguel Malo. Gunderson had submitted an affidavit showing that Cruz had committed perjury in the charges against him (which were later dismissed by a hearing judge), making statements that were not only false but impossible. Judge Torres accepted the prosecution argument that since Gunderson was already arrested, he couldn’t have been an eyewitness to the arrest of Malo and therefore his testimony was irrelevant. 

The prosecution also objected to hearing a second student, Pedro Rivera, who was arrested for carrying a sign saying “Support Our First Amendment Rights, Stop Arresting Our Students”! The judge said he couldn’t tell whether Rivera’s testimony would be relevant, so his name was not included on the witness list “at this time.” Ditto for Professor Gerald Meyer, who was present at a meeting of the faculty executive body that heard testimony from Hostos security chief Bernabé about the arrests which contradicted the account he gave in the prosecution’s complaint.

The one issue where Judge Torres ruled that the defense could call witnesses to testify was on the nature of the atrium where the students demonstrated, which had long been recognized as a “free speech area.” Faculty members Lizette Colón and Henry Lesnick will be allowed to testify on this. However, the response of prosecution to this was to declare they will bring in testimony about the earlier student demonstrations in May 2001, which they claim “got out of hand” and thus supposedly justified banning demonstrations in the atrium. 

Defense attorney McGuire objected vociferously to this blatant “trial by ambush,” saying that the prosecution was trying to portray Miguel Malo as a “malcontent, a troublemaker,” and demanded the right to present videotapes of the May demonstrations. This was denied. When he moved to adjourn the trial for two weeks so that he could call student witnesses about the May demonstrations, this also was denied. 

So even though the judge had earlier agreed with arguments by the Hostos lawyer that the “college policies are not on trial, only the defendant’s actions,” and even though testimony by other students arrested on August 15 was ruled “not relevant,” the prosecution will be allowed to present its version of earlier protests in order to justify its policy of banning demonstrations inside Hostos College! Miguel Malo will be singled out even though all three students who protested that day were arrested for the very act of holding up a sign. No First Amendment rights at issue here, rules the judge, who strikes witnesses in order to make sure this doesn’t come up.

––––––––––––––––––––

Many people have asked why the City University and District Attorney are so intent on going after Miguel Malo. We have pointed out how the lockdown at Hostos College is tied to the government’s drive for broad police-state measures intended to regiment the population for its terrorist “war on terror.” But the push for sharply increased police control of university campuses goes back even farther. In 1995, when there were huge student demos against tuition increases, the CUNY administration set up an elite squad of highly paid campus cops called the “SAFE Team,” which was intended to be rapidly deployed to any of the system’s 18 campuses to deal with “demonstrations and protests,” according to a 5 January 1995 memo by CUNY security director José Elique. 

The CUNY administration is trying to make an example of Miguel Malo of what happens to students who dare to protest, and to use his case to get court backing for its claim that the CUNY “peace officers” have the same status as regular police. City University and State University of New York (SUNY) authorities along with the NYC and NY state governments want to beef up the powers of campus cops at the same time as they are provoking student protests by jacking up tuition to sky-high levels. Yesterday, the legislature voted to impose annual tuition hikes at SUNY, on top of the whopping $950 increase this year. The escalating tuition and laws for greater police powers for campus “peace officers” have been voted by both capitalist parties, Republicans and Democrats alike.

At the same time, in late October, a new law was signed by Governor Pataki allowing the state’s 30 community colleges to replace security guards with “peace officers,” who are authorized to make arrests without warrants, carry guns and undertake investigations (including off-campus). The pretext for the bill was supposedly “increasing incidents of violent behavior, drug use and other types of activity” on campuses. Yet, ironically, an AP dispatch (3 November) reported that “the most recent U.S. Education Department statistics show campuses are reporting few crimes,” and some under-achieving institutions, like Fulton-Montgomery Community College near Albany, “reported no criminal offenses on campus from 1999-2001.” Students, faculty and campus workers should demand: All cops off campus!

The case of Miguel Malo is indeed an example, of the crackdown on the rights of students, immigrants, minorities and working people generally that the “bi-partisan” capitalist rulers are imposing throughout the United States and internationally. The Hostos ban on demonstrations inside the college is the equivalent of the police pens imposed by NYC mayor Giuliani and continued by Bloomberg. To defeat the drive for police-state repression which goes hand in hand with imperialist war, it is necessary to build revolutionary workers parties in the U.S. and throughout the world.

Come out to demonstrate support for Miguel Malo on Friday, December 5, at 9 a.m. sharp, across the street from the Bronx Criminal Court, 215 East 161st Street in the Bronx, located one block east of Grand Concourse (take the 4 or D trains to the 161st Street stop). n 

Defend Miguel Malo! (November 2003) 
Click here to download flyer for December 5 demonstration (requires Acrobat Reader)


To contact the Internationalist Group and the League for the Fourth International, send e-mail to: internationalistgroup@msn.com

Return to THE INTERNATIONALIST GROUP Home Page