Legal action rallies protesters
Lawsuit filed on behalf of 800 people arrested or detained in war protest
By Georgia Evdoxiadis
Co-Editor-in-Chief

In September of 1968, then-Mayor Richard J. Daley (father of Richard M.) made a curious slip of the tongue at a press conference. After Sen. Abraham Ribicoff derided the “Gestapo tactics” the Chicago police used to subdue protesters during the Democratic Convention in August, Daley responded with one of those runs-in-the-family flubs.

“The policeman isn’t there to create disorder,” Daley said, “The policeman is there to preserve disorder.”

Now, more than 30 years after those famous riots, Chicago protesters have gathered together again—to file suit against police officers they say not only preserved disorder, but also created it.

The suit, filed in federal court under the Civil Rights Act, deals only with the events of March 20, when somewhere between 5,000 and 15,000 people protested the first day of war against Iraq.

The lawsuit includes 13 counts against the city of Chicago and the Chicago Police Department, with allegations including false arrest and imprisonment, violation of First Amendment rights, excessive force and a slew of complaints under Illinois state constitutional law.

The suit has been filed on behalf of about 800 people who were detained in the march that shut down Lake Shore Drive. One of the protester included in the suit, Aaron Robin, is a Columbia student majoring in audio arts and acoustics.

The impromptu march did not have a permit to cross onto Lake Shore Drive, but officers nevertheless allowed the protesters to walk down the road, only arresting them as they hit the corner of Michigan and Chicago avenues.

The protesters have sued not only the city and various unnamed police officers, but have also included Police Superintendent Terry Hillard and First District Commander John Risley for ostensibly giving the orders on how to deal with the marchers.

The lawsuit asserts that police never gave an order to disperse, used excessive force and even arrested some passersby who were not involved with the protest.

Police said they charged 353 people after the demonstration, and arrested a total of 543 during the march. The suit makes a distinction between the protesters who were actually charged with a crime and those who were merely detained.

On April 10, the day the suit was filed, the National Lawyers Guild held a press conference at the Dirksen Federal Building to explain the reason behind the class action.

“By the filing of this action, we are demanding that the city of Chicago and Chicago Police Department take responsibility for their actions on March 20, 2003 and be held accountable for their systematic and widespread deprivation of the civil rights of those citizens who exercised their First Amendment freedoms,” said Jim Fennerty, president of the Chicago chapter of the National Lawyers Guild and one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs.

The suit divides the plaintiffs into four different categories, or “subclasses,” and alleges different violations for each group. The first were taken into custody, but were never charged with a crime. The second subclass asserts they were “subjected to unnecessary and/or excessive force and suffered additional specific pain and injury.”

The third group charges they were “deprived of personal property without due process,” and the last say they were “taken into custody based on association or expressive principles,” meaning they were holding signs, banners or loudspeakers.

Columbia student Aaron Lorence, a music business major, said he was at the protests and found the actions of police there questionable.

“I myself felt very intimidated and very distressed,” Lorence, 23, said. “When you see some kid clubbed in the head for no reason, that’s going to piss you off.”

He said he saw police, who he admitted must have been tired and frustrated, take out some of their anger at the tail end of the march.

Lorence said police were friendly throughout most of the protest, but when marchers tried to leave Lake Shore Drive, the environment changed. He said police trapped protesters, not allowing them to disperse, and penned them in on all sides.

“People who asked to leave were denied,” Lorence said.

He said that by the time the marchers reached Chicago Avenue, most of the major media had been forced to leave. That was when Lorence said most of the violence took place.

The lawsuit requests a jury trial, but does not specify a monetary amount being sought for damages.

There is no sign yet as to whether or not the suit will go to trial, but with the city of Chicago’s reputation, the protesters’ charges could possibly go on its record.

“[The suit] is a way to correct public opinion,” said Lorence, “and a way to get justice.”