Evergreen under military occupation?

or...Criminal charges and lawsuit threatened against street theater performance

Campus police have suggested criminal charges and an Evergreen staff is threatening civil action against a street theater performance that occurred on Red Square on May 13.

The performance of a mock checkpoint was organized by the Mideast Solidarity Project (MSP). It featured three people dressed in fatigues with toy guns, standing in front of a painted representation of the West Bank wall. Passersby were asked for their IDs or to identify the contents of their bags. At times during the performance, skits were staged in which volunteers were tackled to the ground, zip-tied, and detained. The toy guns were marked with bright orange tips.

The mock checkpoint was intended to convey the realities of military occupations. Although the focus was on the hundreds of Israeli checkpoints in the Palestinian territories, it also alluded to the US checkpoints established in Iraq and Afghanistan. Two of the mock checkpoint guards were actual military veterans.

On the day of the performance, Hal Van Gilder, project manager for Evergreen facilities, emailed a complaint to Art Costantino, cc’d to Evergreen Police and other members of the college administration. According to the email, “an individual dressed in a military uniform hailed me as ‘Hey, you, tall guy with the bag. What’s in the bag?’” Van Gilder asked what authority the man had. According to Van Gilder, a second mock checkpoint guard pointed his toy gun at Van Gilder and indicated that he was the authority. (Checkpoint participants denied pointing a toy gun at Van Gilder.)

Van Gilder walked away “with the military uniformed men shouting something I don’t recall.”

In the email, Van Gilder claims he was a victim of “assault with a deadly weapon and brandishing a weapon for intimidation.” Van Gilder scolded Costantino for allowing the performance to happen. “Had anyone actually touched me during this exchange we would be having a very different communication.”

Van Gilder filed a formal complaint with TESC Officer April Meyers. In a later email, Van Gilder indicated that “Pending the outcome of these processes will determine what civil actions will be available for me to pursue.” John Hurley, vice president for finance and administration, supported Van Gilder’s police complaint, stating that the street theater performance “should be made an example of as a ‘teachable moment’ for the students, the student group, and any advisor they may have had.”

That afternoon, Officer Meyers sent an email to Evergreen Police and members of the administration, which she hoped would “add value to the discussion” of the performance. Although she acknowledged that she was not present during the performance, she reported that, “It is apparent that the WAY the demonstrators were demonstrating violated three laws.” The laws that Meyers cited (including relevant passages that she highlighted) were:

Unlawful Carrying or Handling of a Weapon
“Weapon” is defined as “any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm.”
Harassment
Defined as “knowingly threaten[ing] to cause physical damage to the property of a person...or subject[ing] the person...to physical confinement or restraint.”
Disorderly Conduct
For “intentionally disrupt[ing] any lawful assembly or meeting of persons without lawful authority.”

Ironically, on the previous day, after the street theater performance had ended, Costantino stated that “Police visited the demonstration a number of times during the day. They indicated to me that they saw no violations of law.”

Because of the threats of criminal and civil action, MSP has declined to make any statements on the record. However, individual members have expressed incredulity at the claims, stating that the only people detained were volunteers, and also pointing out the hypocrisy of these charges, stating that the abortion protesters who frequent Red Square and the belligerent preacher, “Bible Jim” Webber, are routinely granted freedom of speech and not subjected to criminal charges.

Reactions to the mock checkpoint varied greatly. A few active-duty soldiers took personal affront. One passerby approvingly asked, “Are you giving us a taste of our own medicine?” while another asked “Where’s Afghanistan? Is that in Iraq?” MSP members had hoped to prepare a statement of apology and request for dialogue with people who might have been emotionally triggered by the event, but the ongoing police investigation has made public statements inadvisable.

From the beginning, campus police attempted to prevent the street theater from happening. In the morning of May 13, when the mock checkpoint was first set up near the library loop, campus police officer Lana Brewster informed the participants that they needed a permit to demonstrate. Participants said that they were not selling anything and were instead exercising free speech. Onlookers pointed out that the abortion protesters did not need permits. Brewster replied that the abortion protesters protested on Red Square, and the area located at the library loop was not considered “Red Square,” thus making a distinction between Red Square, where free speech is allowed, and the library loop, which supposedly requires a permit to express oneself. However, onlookers noted that religious proselytizers distributed Bibles at the library loop without impedance.

At various times in the morning, Brewster parked her police car in front of the installation in order to obstruct it, blocked the demonstration by positioning her body in front of the participants, and shouted over the participants as they performed. Ironically, onlookers claimed Brewster’s presence made the checkpoint look more official. Brewster also threatened to taser participants if the street theater performance went too far.

The street theater participants eventually acquiesced to Brewster’s demand to move the performance further into Red Square.
Individual members of MSP believe that Campus Police took personal affront to the mock checkpoint – with its depiction of a military occupation on campus – and feel that police may have been concerned that such street theater reflects negatively on the police’s controversial request for AR-15 semiautomatic rifles.

The day after the mock checkpoint, a male Christian proselytizer demonstrated on Red Square and had confrontational encounters with passersby. As of yet, it is unknown whether criminal charges are being considered against him.