San Diego’s Antifa Trial Tests Legal Theories, Investigates Right-Wing Media
A criminal conspiracy case against a San Diego activist group is headed for a trial that could prove crucial in defining the much-misunderstood political movement known as Antifa.
Six members of “San Diego 11” have negotiated a plea bargain with the San Diego District Attorney. However, his five remaining defendants have vowed to bring the case to trial with the help of defense attorneys known for handling high-profile political cases in California.
Defendants are charged with felony charges, including conspiracy to riot, resulting from the January 9, 2021 riots at Pacific Beach. USA TODAY survey found In 2022, anti-fascist groups clashed with white supremacists and Trump supporters throughout a day of protests and dissent, but videos showing white supremacists attacking people Despite the evidence, only self-proclaimed anti-fascists were charged with crimes.
Experts say the San Diego case could set prosecutors across the country on similar agendas. anti-fascist, treats supporters as if they were members of a gang or criminal organization rather than a political movement. The argument may sound conceptual, but the legal implications are significant. A gang-style conspiracy charge can also effectively double a prison sentence.
As such, the San Diego incident marks a harbinger of a time when left-wing protests are blazing across the country.
This month alone, dozens of protesters who opposed police training facilities in Atlanta were arrested in Atlanta and charged with domestic terrorism under new Georgia law, while in Ohio a showdown between neo-Nazis and left-wing supporters took place. Two people were arrested inside. A drug storytelling performance in a city park.
Ohio:Nazi salutes, pepper spray, pistols: Drug event turns into extremist brawl
In Georgia:What is “Cop City”?Why Activists Are Protesting Atlanta’s Police Training Center
The stakes will be higher as the country moves into a new election cycle, says Stanislav Vysotsky, a criminology professor and author of the book American Antifa. A successful prosecution in San Diego could set a model for conservative prosecutors across the country, he said.
“It will be a very powerful tool of repression that can be used against not only anti-fascist activists, but practically any left-wing anti-protester or left-wing protester label,” Vysotsky said. “It actually creates an entity of ‘Antifa’ that doesn’t exist in the first place.”
But as the trial draws near, the case will also test the influence and actions of right-wing media interests. These are some of the same factors that have helped fuel clashes between right-wing and left-wing activists.
An Antifa attorney barred one of the local journalists from reporting on the case, claiming he obtained media credentials by filing court papers under a false name. I asked the court to Her report was used in a right-wing harassment campaign against the defendant.
The journalist in question has been publishing articles under pseudonyms for years, most recently co-authoring a series of articles about the San Diego incident with far-right provocateurs.
The same attorney said he will soon file another motion asking a judge to dismiss a lawsuit aimed at the prosecution’s key expert witnesses. As USA TODAY reported last year, the witness claims to have written for far-right websites and held “speculative and biased” opinions that are not based on fact.
In California:How One Criminal Case Can Redefine The Dismal Left Movement Known As Antifa
Texas:Drag shows, protests, gun lines: how one problem is tearing America apart
San Diego 11
USA TODAY thoroughly investigated the San Diego 11 case last September. At the time, a grand jury had recently indicted the defendants on a total of 29 felony counts, including conspiracy to riot.
The case is not only because prosecutors chose to prosecute only one side involved in the violence that day, but also because Antifa has been described as “a group that uses force, terror, and violence to advance their interests.” , a kind of criminal enterprise that oppresses society.” interests of others,” the District Attorney’s Office said.
In recent years, Antifa has been portrayed by far-right media, commentators, and conspiracy theorists as a brooding bogeyman intent on destroying America. said it could set a strong precedent for prosecutors.
The defense team that has promised to bring the San Diego Antifa case to trial said it was a watershed moment not just for anti-fascism but for free speech in America.
“This is the criminalization of ideology,” said Curtis Briggs, defense attorney for Jeremy White, one of the remaining Antifa defendants. doing.”
Briggs, who recently successfully defended Black Lives Matter protester Tiana Arata, who has been charged with multiple crimes for participating in the protests that blocked California’s highways, said USA TODAY in the San Diego case. He said he had decided to take on the San Diego lawsuit after reading it in .
“This was a political case from the beginning and required a certain kind of attorney,” said Briggs.
Vysotsky said experts across the country studying the anti-fascist movement are watching the San Diego incident closely. A successful indictment that defines Antifa as an organization rather than a political movement could have serious repercussions, he said.
“There’s no doubt there’s something unique about this case in terms of setting a precedent,” Vysotsky said. ”
The remaining five defendants are scheduled to go on trial in November.
The Strange Story of Eva Nott
San Diego’s Antifa case also took a strange turn last month when one of the defense attorneys filed a lawsuit alleging a local journalist had committed a number of felonies.
For years, journalist Katherine Cranston has been writing for the San Diego Reader, a local free magazine, using the pseudonym “Eva Knott,” according to a motion filed by attorney John Hamasaki. The editors and publisher of did not respond to a request for comment, but previously confirmed to USA TODAY that Eva Knott is a pseudonym.
Under Knott’s signature, Cranston recently co-authored several articles on the San Diego incident with Andy Ngo, a far-right political opponent who has made a name for himself as an anti-fascist opponent across the country. He is the editor of the conservative Canadian website Post Millennial, which regularly writes articles highly critical of Antifa. Similarly, his Ngo and Knott story about the San Diego case is critical of the defendant.
Hamasaki’s motion mentions that Cranston filed papers in a court in San Diego asking for permission to record and photograph hearings in the case. Hamasaki claims to have filled out court documents, and the court filings allege a felony under California law.
Cranston then shared the photos she took in court with Ngo, who published them on social media and on his website, the allegation alleges. As a result of this propaganda, “Defendants became the target of a campaign of harassment by right-wing extremists,” the motion states.
Stanford Law School professor John Donahue said it was questionable that Cranston’s actions violated the law cited by Hamasaki. Donahue said Cranston would have to file the documents with “improper intent.”
“If she regularly wrote using that pseudonym, you could argue that she was using her legal name,” said Donoghue. just as you might have.”
Cranston did not respond to a request for comment. In a statement, Ngo wrote:
“The San Diego Antifa conspiracy to which you contacted me includes suspects who have already pleaded guilty to planning and carrying out extreme acts of violence against the public, and they I would like my colleague and I to report the crime.
(As USA TODAY reported last year, victims of attacks by anti-fascist activists were accused by activists of being white supremacist agitators notorious for spurring fights in areas where they were not welcome. Includes people identified, at least one of whom has a criminal record and long-term involvement with a neo-Nazi group.)
A USA TODAY reporter asked Cranston about the name outside of last year’s lawsuit hearing. Is it?” he said.
“My name is Eva Nott,” she continued.
Knott’s press pass was revoked by the San Diego Police Department in October. It would be convenient if you could.)
The San Diego Sheriff’s Department, which has jurisdiction over crimes committed in San Diego Superior Court, did not respond to a request for comment asking whether Cranston was being investigated for false allegations.
At a recent hearing in the Antifa case, Cranston was asked by bailiffs to leave the front row of the courtroom where the media usually sit. It’s unclear if she will still be able to attend the hearing.
Defendant seeks dismissal of lawsuit
Hamasaki said he would move to dismiss the lawsuit against his client because it was based on inaccurate and misleading testimony from key prosecution expert witnesses who testified before the grand jury that indicted last year’s San Diego 11 case. rice field.
As USA TODAY reported last year, Dawn Perlmutter, a self-described expert investigating religious terrorism and symbolism, wrote a screed against Antifa and Black Lives Matter protesters in a right-wing publication. We have a history.
Mr. Hamasaki said the “incompetent and irrelevant evidence” Mr. Perlmatter provided to the grand jury “blemished grand jury proceedings to such an extent that it violated the constitutional rights of his client and resulted in an indictment.” said to claim.
A counter-argument against a key witness is essentially a microcosm of the case itself.
Hamasaki’s argument, as explained to the grand jury, is that Perlmutter’s definition of Antifa is inaccurate, biased, and not supported by facts. Hamasaki argued that it was too out of line with the reality of what was to come, unfairly tainting the grand jury’s decision to indict his client.
In another lawsuit, a Pennsylvania court issued an injunction against allegations that led to Perlmutter being called a “troublesome litigant.” Court records attributed the injunction to Perlmutter’s unsuccessful civil lawsuit “in seven different cases of hers filed in federal and state courts over a decade.”
Perlmutter did not respond to a request for comment.
