A Street Performer Crusades for the First Amendment
By ANEMONA HARTOCOLLIS
Published: September 26, 2007
What is the purpose of the First Amendment?
That was the question before a judge in Manhattan Criminal Court
yesterday, as a street performer named Reverend Billy, a k a William
Talen, faced charges of harassing police officers in Union Square Park
by reciting the First Amendment to the Constitution.
Mr. Talen —
the white-suited, blond-pompadoured leader of the mock Church of Stop
Shopping who is perhaps best known for his crusade against Starbucks —
was arrested June 29. He had joined a protest against the city's new
permit requirements [reports on the protest by newsgrist here and here] for the monthly Critical Mass bicycle rally and
proposed restrictions on photographers and filmmakers in public places.
He
was charged with two counts of second-degree harassment, under a
statute originally intended for use against stalkers. He was accused of
following a group of officers while repeatedly reciting the 40-odd
words of the First Amendment through a megaphone, the kind commonly
used by cheerleaders.
After his arrest, Mr. Talen said, he was
jailed for 20 hours, first in a Gramercy Park precinct house, then in
the underground Manhattan Detention Complex, popularly known as the
Tombs, where he felt compelled to live up to his stage name by
ministering to the less fortunate. In the precinct house, he said, he
provided pastoral counseling to a young man who was crying after he was
arrested for carrying a joint in his pocket. In the Tombs, one of the
medical attendants recognized him and offered to put him in a "special"
cell, which turned out to be for mental patients, Mr. Talen said.
In
court yesterday, the prosecutor told Judge Tanya Kennedy that Mr.
Talen's offense had been to shout the familiar lines beginning with "Congress shall make no law" while standing just three feet from the
officers, and to ignore their requests to stop. The prosecutor, Mary
Weisgerber, said his behavior was "obnoxious" by any standard.
"That's not true," Mr. Talen piped up.
Outside
of court, Mr. Talen — who says that his lungs are like bullhorns
because he has had operatic training — maintained that he was about 15
feet from the officers and that his account was supported by a
videotape of the episode that has been preserved on YouTube.
Such findings of fact — three feet or 15 feet? — may someday go to a jury.
Yesterday's hearing turned on a more scholarly question: Does reciting the First Amendment serve a legitimate purpose?
Mr.
Talen, 57, appeared in court looking, as he put it, more like a Puritan
than a preacher in a black suit and a white shirt, a reversal of his
usual outfit, and his blond hair lank instead of puffy. His wife, who
is Reverend Billy's theatrical director and who goes by the name
Savitri D., was at his side.
His lawyers, Norman Siegel
and Earl Ward, told Judge Kennedy that the law defined harassment as
engaging in a course of conduct that is not only "alarming" and "annoying" but "which serves no legitimate purpose."
Mr. Siegel
argued that there could hardly be a more legitimate place than a
protest rally to recite the First Amendment, with its lines barring
Congress from "abridging the freedom of speech" and guaranteeing the
rights "of the people peaceably to assemble."
The Court of
Appeals, the state's highest court, has ruled that for a course of
conduct to have "no legitimate purpose" it must have no thoughts or
ideas besides threats, intimidation or "coercive utterances," Mr.
Siegel said in a written brief.
The courts have found that it is
not a crime for a husband to call his wife crude and vulgar names, Mr.
Siegel said, quoting a case in which a judge ruled that "the
registering of displeasure with another person is protected speech."
If
swearing at one's wife can serve a legitimate purpose, Mr. Siegel said,
reciting the First Amendment at a protest rally can, too. "We
respectfully submit that reciting the 44 words of the First Amendment,
you have a First Amendment right to do that," Mr. Siegel added.
Mr.
Siegel asked Judge Kennedy to dismiss the charges, saying this was a "quintessential" case of a prosecutor acting without a basis in the
law.
Under the charges, Mr. Talen could be sentenced to up to 15 days in jail.
Ms.
Weisgerber told the judge that she needed more time to formulate a
response. Judge Kennedy gave the district attorney's office until Oct.
15 to respond in writing and set a court date for Nov. 14. If the
prosecution misses that deadline, Judge Kennedy said, she will grant
the motion to dismiss the charges.