Page 1 of 3
Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
Posted: 2003-03-05 03:31pm
by Hamel
ABC/Reuters
— NEW YORK (Reuters) - A lawyer was arrested late Monday and charged with trespassing at a public mall in the state of New York after refusing to take off a T-shirt advocating peace that he had just purchased at the mall.
According to the criminal complaint filed on Monday, Stephen Downs was wearing a T-shirt bearing the words "Give Peace A Chance" that he had just purchased from a vendor inside the Crossgates Mall in Guilderland, New York, near Albany.
"I was in the food court with my son when I was confronted by two security guards and ordered to either take off the T-shirt or leave the mall," said Downs.
When Downs refused the security officers' orders, police from the town of Guilderland were called and he was arrested and taken away in handcuffs, charged with trespassing "in that he knowingly enter(ed) or remain(ed) unlawfully upon premises," the complaint read.
No, no sir I don't like it.
Posted: 2003-03-05 03:35pm
by jegs2
I think there is likely more to the story than that. Perhaps his behavior also influenced actions. If the story is genuine though, I foresee a nasty and costly lawsuit.
Posted: 2003-03-05 03:40pm
by Dalton
It begins...
Posted: 2003-03-05 03:44pm
by neoolong
It's seems like a freedom of speech issue. But it seems really odd and like jeg2 says, there probably is more to it.
Posted: 2003-03-05 03:46pm
by Lonestar
Like Jegs, I think there is more to the story than that.
But, last time I checked the Constitution was in effect, and if the Mall didn't want anti-war propaganda in the building, they should have told the store that was selling it, not harrased the man who bought it.
Posted: 2003-03-05 03:48pm
by Kuja
What ELSE was on the t-shirt, I wonder?
Posted: 2003-03-05 03:50pm
by theski
Posted: 2003-03-05 03:53pm
by Hamel
From that article
Crossgates Mall security received a complaint regarding two individuals disrupting customers.
Funny how the response doesn't clarify exactly what the lawyer was doing that was disruptive.
The response from the mall administration sounds infinitely more bullshitive than the lawyer's story.
Posted: 2003-03-05 03:55pm
by Kuja
Funny how the response doesn't clarify exactly what the lawyer was doing that was disruptive.
Funny how your original artical never explicitly states that he was arrested for what the t-shirt says.
Posted: 2003-03-05 03:59pm
by Luke Starkiller
IG-88E wrote:Funny how the response doesn't clarify exactly what the lawyer was doing that was disruptive.
Funny how your original artical never explicitly states that he was arrested for what the t-shirt says.
It does actually, sort of. It says that the security guards asked him to take it off or leave and he refused so they got him for tresspassing.
There has to me more to this story than this though.
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:02pm
by namdoolb
My problem with this is not that they were asked to leave and then subsequently arrested when they failed to do that:
Shops/malls are private property and the security have the right to ask people to leave without even giving a reason if they feel so inclined.
What gets me is that a Store within the Mall was allowed to sell these same T-shirts that they got into so much trouble for wearing.
I'm still trying to decide wether it's the individual shop or the Mall itself that's at fault here. That would be dependant on things I don't know, but I'm guessing that ultimately this will probably fall on the head of the mall rather than the T-shirt shop.
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:05pm
by Kuja
Luke Starkiller wrote:IG-88E wrote:
Funny how your original artical never explicitly states that he was arrested for what the t-shirt says.
It does actually, sort of. It says that the security guards asked him to take it off or leave and he refused so they got him for tresspassing.
There has to me more to this story than this though.
Read it through CAREFULLY Luke. And don't just read what the reporter says, read the quotes:
Downs said police tried to convince him he was wrong in his actions by refusing to remove the T-shirt because the mall
"was like a private house and that I was acting poorly."
-interesting, don't you think?
"I was in the food court with my son when I was confronted by two security guards and ordered to either take off the T-shirt or leave the mall," said Downs.
-now, here's where Reuters is aasking you to make a leap in logic from "man weraing peace t-shirt thrown out" to "man thrown out FOR wearing peace t-shirt" when it's not necessarily true.
It's not the largest leap in logic I've ever seen, but it is one. And I still wonder what ELSE was on the t-shirt.
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:14pm
by Luke Starkiller
IG-88E wrote:Luke Starkiller wrote:IG-88E wrote:
Funny how your original artical never explicitly states that he was arrested for what the t-shirt says.
It does actually, sort of. It says that the security guards asked him to take it off or leave and he refused so they got him for tresspassing.
There has to me more to this story than this though.
Read it through CAREFULLY Luke. And don't just read what the reporter says, read the quotes:
Downs said police tried to convince him he was wrong in his actions by refusing to remove the T-shirt because the mall
"was like a private house and that I was acting poorly."
-interesting, don't you think?
Yes, it would indicate that there is more to this than the shirt simply saying 'give peace a chance'. Off hand I can think of several illustrations that could go along with that and be 'inappropriate.'
What do they mean by "the mall
"was like a private house and that I was acting poorly."" though? That sentance needs to be in context to make any sense.
"I was in the food court with my son when I was confronted by two security guards and ordered to either take off the T-shirt or leave the mall," said Downs.
-now, here's where Reuters is aasking you to make a leap in logic from "man weraing peace t-shirt thrown out" to "man thrown out FOR wearing peace t-shirt" when it's not necessarily true.
It's not the largest leap in logic I've ever seen, but it is one. And I still wonder what ELSE was on the t-shirt.
Since he was given the ultimatum of taking off the shirt or leaving then that indicates that the shirt was the reason for his expulsion. I also am interested in finding out the entirety of what was on the shirt.
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:19pm
by Kuja
Luke Starkiller wrote:Since he was given the ultimatum of taking off the shirt or leaving then that indicates that the shirt was the reason for his expulsion.
Yes, the shirt was the reason, however, the articale never says that it was because it was a pro-peace shirt.
I also am interested in finding out the entirety of what was on the shirt.
Yes, there are a thousand other reason it could have gotten him thrown out. For example, what if he bought the shirt, then went into the bathroom, took a magic marker or something, and wrote "I'm gonna fuck your bitch ass." on the back? Granted, that's quite unlikely, but it would give the mall grounds for ejecting him because of the shirt.
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:20pm
by Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi
There must be some sort of hidden motive, I don't believe wearing a "peace" T-shirt is reason enough to throw someone out of a mall. After all, I've seen far more offensive clothing at the mall.
Perhaps the security guard thought the guy was hot and was just using the shirt as an excuse to see him topless.
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:20pm
by Stravo
Fucking media and their agendas. Why do we have to sit here and FUCKING PIECE TOGTHER what happened when the news is supposed to do that????!!!!
Maybe because they have an agenda they are trying to support? How about reporting the fucking facts and not make it into a guessing game? If he was thrown out soley for the shirt (which I think the majority of us don;t seem to agree with this INTERPRETATION) then say so! If he was being an asshole and abusing the shopping public then say so! News is about reporting the facts, not spinning it to your viewpoint. In other words, don't INTERPRET the news for me, that's MY fucking job, NOT some liberal arts major in communications. Fuckers.
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:24pm
by Kuja
Stravo wrote:News is about reporting the facts, not spinning it to your viewpoint. In other words, don't INTERPRET the news for me, that's MY fucking job, NOT some liberal arts major in communications. Fuckers.
Ah, you've hit the crux of the matter, Strav. News USED to be news. Period. Now, news is considered entertainment, and the media is more intersted in keeping viewers than reporting fair and balanced news. In other words, it shouldn't be lent as much credence as many people are willing to give it.
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:26pm
by neoolong
Here's a bit more to the story.
DAMITA CHAMBERS, Associated Press Writer wrote:GUILDERLAND, N.Y. - About 100 anti-war demonstrators marched through a mall Wednesday to protest the arrest of a shopper who wore a T-shirt that read "Peace on Earth" and "Give Peace a Chance."
"We just want to know what the policy is and why it's being randomly enforced," said Erin O'Brien, an organizer of the noontime rally at the Crossgates Mall.
Protest leaders were scheduled to meet with the mall's manager after the rally. Calls to mall officials were not immediately returned.
On Monday, Stephen Downs, 61, and his son were asked by mall security guards to remove their peace-slogan shirts or leave. Downs' 31-year-old son, Roger, took off his shirt. But Downs refused.
The guards called police, and he was charged with trespassing and pleaded innocent.
Police Chief James Murley said: "We don't care what they have on their shirts, but they were asked to leave the property, and it's private property."
The men had had the T-shirts made at a mall store and wore them while they shopped.
Source
I think the bolded part is interesting.
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:30pm
by Hamel
edit
ops~~ nevermind
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:31pm
by jegs2
Stravo wrote:Fucking media and their agendas. Why do we have to sit here and FUCKING PIECE TOGTHER what happened when the news is supposed to do that????!!!!
Maybe because they have an agenda they are trying to support? How about reporting the fucking facts and not make it into a guessing game? If he was thrown out soley for the shirt (which I think the majority of us don;t seem to agree with this INTERPRETATION) then say so! If he was being an asshole and abusing the shopping public then say so! News is about reporting the facts, not spinning it to your viewpoint. In other words, don't INTERPRET the news for me, that's MY fucking job, NOT some liberal arts major in communications. Fuckers.
That's why we have Fox News as a counterbalance to the liberal media. They report the
whole story...
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:32pm
by Kuja
Protest leaders were scheduled to meet with the mall's manager after the rally. Calls to mall officials were not immediately returned.
This phase inherently pisses me off. It can mean almost anything, yet it's almost always meant to be interpereted in a negative fashion.
If a reporter calls me house when I'm at work, he's certainly not going to have his call returned until I get home hours later. If he dials a wrong number, I'm of course not going to reply. Yet somehow, all the blame rests with me. Goddamn media.
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:32pm
by Hamel
That's why we have Fox News as a counterbalance to the liberal media. They report the whole story...
What liberal media?
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:34pm
by theski
Speaking of spining, My Girlfriend likes to watch The Today show in the morning. I can't even go in the same room. If I hear Katie Curic spin and slant the war news and questions to quests, I am going to throw the tv out the damm window.. She is the worst..
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:34pm
by Kuja
jegs2 wrote:That's why we have Fox News as a counterbalance to the liberal media. They report the whole story...
Ever watch Hannity and Combs? That's one of the few news shows I actually pay attention to. Between a far right (Hannity) and a far left (Combs) the two of them will take a point, argue it to death, then beat it the dead point with a stick, just to make sure they've covered every possible avenue of looking at it.
Posted: 2003-03-05 04:36pm
by jegs2
IG-88E wrote:Ever watch Hannity and Combs? That's one of the few news shows I actually pay attention to. Between a far right (Hannity) and a far left (Combs) the two of them will take a point, argue it to death, then beat it the dead point with a stick, just to make sure they've covered every possible avenue of looking at it.
From what I've heard, Combs is a bit of an outcast in the liberal community for participating on Fox News...