…this was before I found and purchased the book, Sense of the Sixties…
more on crime...
Like I posted above, the heart of changing any system, I think, begins with educating the masses, not just a select group of people like the establishment who can exploit those who do not have the same knowledge they do.
In 1994, I was arrested for making a benign statement in a phone conversation, communicating a threat. The plaintiff embellished her story to the magistrate, to include false imprisonment by use of a handgun that I did not own and do not possess, after I had asked her if she would drop me off at the International House of Pancakes, as I had not eaten much for several days and I was hungry, I was walking and it ws hot. She had agreed to do that. On the way I asked her if she had time to stop and let me show her some sketches I had done which I had pawned at a pawn shop. She claimed she was in a hurry but did drop me off at the IHOP. She tried to detain me in her truck in order to continue the conversation we were having. I told her I was hungry and invited her in to eat with me. She refused, we said goodbye and I got out of the truck. After I had dinner, I took the bus from the IHOP to my hotel room and 4 hours later the police were knocking on the door. The plaintiff's obvious guilt and paranoia regarding our history and the things she had done of which I had intimate knowledge, caused her to exaggerate her story in order that I be incarcerated, at which time I did spend 6 months in a jail. Having had a previous record, and without counsel, I was convicted of both charges, after I had been deliberately detained for the length of the sentence, 6 months, before even being tried.
My point is this, not having ever been involved with the legal system in my past in this way, aside from a conviction 4 years earlier, I had no conscious knowledge that communicating a threat was a crime, punishable by law. Had I known that and had I known her state of mind, I certainly would not have verbalized it to her. The statement I made, "I could kill you for that", was not unlike similar statements I had made in previous situations with others and even with my sister which I never took seriously. I was not enraged or even mildly angry, although the plaintiff attempted to make it seem as though I was. I had spent the week prior to our encounter, sleeping on the grounds of the Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Church, and various other places. I was too exhausted from lack of sleep to even think about killing anyone and I was not contemplating killing even myself under those dire circumstances, yet the plaintiff was smoking profusely, a habit she had when I first met her in 1979 and a habit I had relinquished 4 years earlier. The plaintiff and I had attended AA meetings together, but obviously she had not practiced many of the steps nor sought to resolve her own spiritual disease.
This is what I mean David when I say we need to educate. Anyone can fabricate a story and have someone incarcerated, just to get back at them. I have to wonder how many of the 2 million people in prison and jail in this country are there as the result of similar reasons?
And you know, the system really puts you in a double bind, damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. A therapist wants you to express your feelings, catharsis I believe they call it, and the plaintiff must have known about this as her father was a minister and counseled many people, but I guess if you say it to the wrong person, you get persecuted and prosecuted.
Kay F Gibbs
- posted by Kay @ 2:25 PM 0 comments
