"On Friday morning, lawyers representing the activists announced the withdrawal in San Francisco Superior Court and said they had reached agreements with six of the nine individuals who filed restitution claims, mostly for the wages lost due to being stuck on the bridge. Judge Brian J. Stretch ultimately found that protesters would have to collectively pay just under $5,300 to the nine people for the losses they incurred. Divided among the 16 defendants who had agreed to a diversion program, which includes paying restitution, Stretch said the total would come out to $331.16 per person."
""Individually and as a group, it's a win for people to get cases dismissed, but it's not a win in terms of what's going on in the world," said Bobbie Stein, a lawyer representing one of the protesters. "This district attorney's office has aggressively prosecuted these cases where people were exercising their First Amendment rights, their dissent and their outrage over the genocide that's taking place in Gaza.""
""I think it is a calculated tactic to weaponize restitution, to chill people's First Amendment rights, to chill people's actions, to make them think, 'No, I better not do that because I'm going to be liable for so much money. I can't afford to exercise my rights,'" Stein said."
Claims tied to a bridge protest were largely withdrawn after lawyers reached agreements with six of nine claimants, mainly over lost wages from being stuck on the bridge. A judge found protesters must collectively repay just under $5,300 to nine people, which equates to $331.16 per person when divided among 16 defendants enrolled in a diversion program. The district attorney encouraged affected people to seek compensation. Activists accused the district attorney of targeting pro-Palestinian protesters and using restitution to chill First Amendment rights, drawing parallels to similar restitution claims against Stanford protesters.
Read at Kqed
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]