On September 17th, 2007, University of Florida student Andrew Meyer was subdued, tasered, and arrested by police at a question and answer session featuring Senator John Kerry. He was later charged with inciting a riot, disturbing the peace, and resisting arrest. Following the incident, controversy erupted as to the validity of the arrest and whether Meyer’s free speech was violated. Here, I will offer the background facts concerning the incident, present both sides of the ongoing issue, and then issue my final judgment.
To maintain objectivity, rather than recount the incident here, I will provide the following websites from reputable news outlets that contain coverage of the event. Also, I will provide links to several videos of the event.
CNN: http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2007/US/09/18/student.tasered/index.html
It should be noted with this article that video evidence shows that Meyer did in fact not say "You will take my question because I have been listening to your crap for two hours." Instead, the quote was “I'll ask my question. I'm going to preface it. He's been talking for two hours, I think I can have two minutes.”
CBS News: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/18/politics/politico/thecrypt/main3272316.shtml?source=search_story
Video One (begins at Meyer’s words to Kerry and ends with Meyer being escorted out of the room by police): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaiWCS10C5s
Video Two: (begins as police begin to apprehend Meyer, shows the interactions between Meyer and the police officers outside the auditorium, and ends with Meyer being escorted out of the building): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8ndctwAJmU
The argument for Meyer incorporates much common sense and decency but very little Constitutional evidence. Some contend that Meyer was merely elaborating on his question before ultimately posing it to Senator Kerry. Even though the demeanor by which he addressed Kerry was undoubtedly not tranquil, his actions do not constitute that of inciting a riot. He was addressing Kerry and Kerry alone (not the student body), and video evidence also shows that the students were in fact not even the least riled until the actual altercation took place between Meyer and the officers.
The main point of contention the Meyer supporters have is the manner by which the police officers subdued the student. There have been a plethora of precedents set in the courts concerning unlawful arrest [see footnote #1]. Two that hold significance here are those of State v. Mobley and Jones v. State. The first case states that “Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” It is evident in the video footage that Meyer clearly is befuddled as to why he is being arrested (although some claim this was all part of his grand scheme – a topic I will address later) and would therefore be justified in resisting. The latter of the above cases states that “These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” This approach appeals to the “excessive force angle” that Meyer’s lawyers are planning to utilize in court. That is, Meyer many times throughout the ordeal said that he was planning to make his point to Kerry then peacefully leave the premises. The tasering, therefore, was completely unnecessary and an instance of brutality.
At the same time, there exists Constitutional evidence working against Meyer. Those who contend that his speech was indeed inciteful would refer to the case of Feiner v. New York (1951) [footnote #2], where it was ruled that inciteful speech is not protected under the First Amendment. Or one could even make a claim for obscenity (i.e. Meyer’s reference to the fact that “[former President Bill] Clinton was impeached for…a blowjob.”), citing the definition given to obscenity in Miller v. California [footnote #3].
However, with all this concrete evidence being presented, one may nearly examine the character of Andrew Meyer as a person to get the true picture of his motivations. Meyer is a columnist for The Independent Florida Alligator, the school’s campus newspaper. He self-describes his work as “[trying] to write mostly whimsical nonsense columns about nothing in particular, yet occasionally finds himself angry enough to rain down fire and brimstone on an unsuspecting politician or celebrity.” [footnote #4]. Does that last part sound familiar? In addition to his journalistic duties with The Independent Florida Alligator, Meyer also operates his own website, www.theandrewmeyer.com. Here, one can find videos of previous practical jokes that Meyer has participated in, as well as criticism of the Iraq War and the media’s tendency to focus on celebrity gossip rather than the war. Again, sound familiar? According to police reports [footnote #5], Meyer instructed a female companion to videotape his interaction with Kerry. And what to me is the most damning evidence against Meyer’s claims of free speech violation, officers also reported that "as [Meyer] was escorted down stairs with no cameras in sight, he remained quiet, but once the cameras made their way down stairs he started screaming and yelling again." Once Meyer was in the police vehicle and out of the public eye, he was described as "laughing and being lighthearted in the car. His demeanor completely changed once the cameras were not in sight." Meyer is also quoted as stating "I am not mad at you guys [the officers], you didn't do anything wrong, you were just trying to do your job."
All of these claims lead this blogger to believe that Andrew Meyer’s display was nothing more than an attempt to create a scene that would further his reputation of a prankster that is critical of the United States Government and give him his fifteen minutes of fame. The manner by which he questioned John Kerry and his subsequent actions were greatly exaggerated. As one of the attending police officers puts it, Meyer was “yelling as loud as he could as to sensationalize his presence.” Even Senator Kerry, who initially tried to diffuse the situation, was disappointed that a healthy question and answer session was derailed by Meyer’s unorthodox actions.
Andrew Meyer’s actions do not exemplify the ideals of free speech under the First Amendment; it is an abuse of those rights for his personal gain.
#1: http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/defunlaw.htm
#2: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/feiner.html
#3: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/miller.html
#4: http://www.freewebs.com/newforum/bioandpersonalstories.htm
#5: Police Report, Statement of Officer Pablo De JesusI observed Meyer hand a digital hand-held camera to white female he was present with, and it appeared that he instructed her to film his interaction.
Police Report, Statement of Officer Nicole Lynn Mallo The man at that point turned to his friend and said, "Are you taping this? Do you have this? You ready?" The man was talking to a woman who was there to film him.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)