 |
Six Protesters Arrested At Baywalk
(Including three teenagers, one aged 13)
Two
St. Pete for Peace members were being arrested without cause, when
instead of just allowing this injustice to happen, a small contingent
of members chose to try to prevent their arrest through nonviolent
civil disobedience.
|
August 6, 2005
VIDEO FOOTAGE OF SOME OF THE ARRESTS
(Courtesy of Joe Porter, Len Schmiege and Mike O'Neill)
|
|
Six people were arrested at Baywalk on Saturday night, August 6th.
|
A
13-year old boy was arrested for being on the PUBLIC sidewalk and
“blocking pedestrian traffic.” The young man was not
carrying a sign nor was he attempting to interfere with anyone.
He was just going from one end of a public sidewalk to the other.
|
Afterwards, another protester was videotaping near where the 13-year
old was arrested. Police then arrested the second protester, who
was later charged with trespassing.
The remaining demonstrators made their way down to the police van
holding the two detainees. Some protesters attempted to stop the
van from driving those arrested down to the police station by locking
arms in front of it.
Four of the protesters were then arrested and charged with blocking a
roadway and disobeying a lawful command. The remaining protesters
returned to Baywalk and chanted, sang and shouted slogans at the police
until after 11pm. The juveniles were released a few hours after
they were arrested. The three adults were brought down to the
police station and were released on bail early the next morning.
The cops want to intimidate and harass us. The cops’ use of
barricades is to force protesters onto Baywalk property where they can
proceed to arrest us. They are set up in such a way so that
people cannot walk down the public sidewalk without either going out
into the street or walking onto Baywalk property.
|
|
|
|
Story Background
Baywalk and the City of St. Petersburg are trying to take away the
rights of protesters to stand on the PUBLIC sidewalk in front of
Baywalk. Click here to read the St. Pete Times story. Click here to watch Channel 10's coverage. Click here to see a few photos of the barricades.
| Our
understanding is that Baywalk and the city of St. Petersburg are
testing barricades on weekends to see if they improve pedestrian
safety. One option being considered is the construction of
permanent barricades. If this were to happen we would not be
allowed to protest on the north side of the sidewalk in front of
Baywalk. In addition to the
unsubstantiated claim that protesters cause a safety hazard, Baywalk
management says our protests are bad for business. |
"I
was assured that the protesters' right to continue protesting was not
being prevented by the barricades. Now do they have as much
freedom as they did before those went up? Probably not."
St. Petersburg Councilmember Richard Kriseman (read) |
According to Sembler CEO Sher: "Many patrons stay away from Baywalk because of the congestion caused by the protesters." And Bruce Rabon, owner of Hurricane Pass and Metropolitan Outfitters claimed, "when
the protesters began, our Saturday night business ceased to
exist." Tom Silverberg, owner of Jess Jewelers (one of the
stores in which we protest near) recently said: ".[the protesters]..are abusing the privilege of free speech, [and] are jeopardizing my freedom to run a small business."
 |
Mayor Rick Baker
(727) 893-7201
mayor@stpete.org
City Council
(727) 893-7117 council@stpete.org
St. Pete Times
http://www.sptimes.com/letters/
Your
letter can be as simple as one sentence or as detailed as you
choose. Please just let the city know that you don't want Baywalk
to gain control of the public sidewalk and that it is time for the
barricades to be removed.
|
|
- If these barricades stay in place,
anyone needing to exit Baywalk quickly in an emergency situation would
face a tangle of metal gates that could prevent their safe
escape. This is ironic, particularly in the context of the
rationale for the barricades: public safety. This also adds
credence to our assessment that the true motivation behind the
barricades is Baywalk's desire to stop our protests on the public
sidewalk in front of the entertainment complex. Greg Sembler, Vice Chairman of the Sembler Company (which owns Baywalk) has essentially said so:
 |
"I still think we need to own the sidewalk" - Greg Sembler (May 3, 2005) |
The City
of St. Petersburg has implemented these barricades at the request of
Baywalk management, following a study done by a group called the St. Petersburg Downtown Partnership, Inc. The problem is that, on the Executive Committee of this group is
 |
Craig Sher,
President/CEO of the Sembler Company. Obviously, this is a
conflict of interest. Not coincidentally, the group's long-term
recommendation is to give Baywalk control of the public sidewalk. (SP Times Interview Mar '05)
|
No public hearings, no discussion -- they're just taking taxpayer property. Last year they tried to set up "no protest zones." Earlier this year
they tried to buy the public sidewalk. Now, Baywalk and the city
are reportedly planning on constructing permanent barriers and saying
protesters won't be able to stand on the PUBLIC sidewalk!
The reason given for these barricades?
Pedestrian safety.
|
However, we've been demonstrating at Baywalk nearly every Saturday for 2 1/2 years and there have been
ZERO pedestrian accidents during our protests.
|
Civil
liberties have been under attack in the U.S. for quite some time, and
our government has a long history of repressing the voice of dissent:
And many others around the country are feeling the wrath of our system:
Britain (U.S. ally) is rounding up Muslims and in Pakistan (U.S. ally) they are cracking down hard, as well:
|
Click here to watch Tampa Bay's 10 coverage of recent protest. Click here for info about our free speech struggle with Baywalk last year. Click here for general info on our protests at Baywalk.
"Public
protests can be inconvenient, annoying and noisy affairs. But our
Constitution has chosen the mess of freedom and democracy over the
order that comes with repression.
When
police address protesters in an aggressive manner and resort to
hypertechnical arrests for minor offenses, they are creating an
intimidating environment in an effort to discourage future
demonstrations. Our community's priorities are clear: It's commerce
over conversation at BayWalk, where our areas's most active and engaged
citizens are decidedly not welcome."
From "Activists deserve praise, not harassment" by Robyn E. Blumner, St. Petersburg Times, Aug. 21, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
