2 who refused to testify about May Day anarchists released

SEATTLE (AP) — Two people were released Thursday after spending five months in custody — much of it in solitary confinement — for refusing to answer questions before a federal grand jury investigating last spring's May Day riot in Seattle.
Katherine Olejnik and Matthew Duran of Olympia were found in civil contempt of court last September for declining to say what they might know about a group of black-clad Northwest anarchists who smashed windows of cars and buildings after breaking away from a protest march.
U.S. District Judge Richard Jones ordered their release on Wednesday, saying it was clear further time at the Federal Detention Center in Seatac wasn't going to persuade them to talk. The judge said they should be freed by 4 p.m. Thursday, and they were released at 4 p.m. on the dot, met by close friends and family, said Olejnik's lawyer, Jenn Kaplan.
"We're thrilled," Kaplan said. "It's a vindication of what our clients have been saying from the outset: that they were never going to participate in this witch hunt."
Neither Olejnik nor Duran was suspected of involvement in the vandalism, but they were subpoenaed to testify as part of the grand jury investigation. Among the buildings damaged were Niketown, several bank offices and the building that houses the Seattle branch of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Seattle police arrested several suspects, at least three of whom were convicted, and federal agents sought to find the culprits who damaged the courthouse.
A federal search warrant affidavit filed in the case was mistakenly unsealed and obtained by The Seattle Times last October. It laid out a glimpse of the case, showing that state and federal agents were watching some members of the small group of Portland anarchists even before May Day. The affidavit said investigators were tracking members as early as April 9, when they and others were observed by FBI surveillance at a Portland event.
Agents later watched the anarchists as they traveled north for the May 1 protest.
Olejnik told the grand jury that she wasn't at the protest, that she didn't know who had gone to Seattle to take part, and that no one had told her what happened during it, Kaplan said. But once the prosecutor began asking about the political beliefs of others, she clammed up — and kept quiet, even after being offered immunity.
"It was something that was just undertaken to propagate fear within the community," Kaplan said. "The idea that your friends were going to be at risk of having to testify against you or going to jail - this could happen to anybody if they happen to know someone who's suspected of a crime."
The judge found Olejnik and Duran in civil contempt of court last September and ordered them jailed. The confinement could have lasted another 13 months, but the pair only appeared to be becoming more resolute, he wrote, and further confinement appeared pointless. They could face future prosecution for criminal contempt of court.
"Whatever the merits of their choices not to testify, their demeanor has never given the court reason to doubt their sincerity or the strength of their convictions," Jones wrote.
The U.S. attorney's office in Seattle declined to comment Thursday, but issued a statement last fall saying prosecutors do not "investigate or seek to silence lawful free speech, or dissent. We do, however, investigate and enforce the law where speech crosses the line and becomes threats or acts of violence."
"We are not free to disseminate our filings regarding a grand jury matter," spokeswoman Emily Langlie wrote in an email Thursday.
Duran served two weeks in solitary confinement at the start of his detention, returned in late December and has been there ever since, the judge wrote. Olejnik served her first six days in solitary, and was returned there from Dec. 27 until at least Feb. 12.
Their physical and mental health had deteriorated, the judge said.
Katherine Olejnik and Matthew Duran of Olympia were found in civil contempt of court last September for declining to say what they might know about a group of black-clad Northwest anarchists who smashed windows of cars and buildings after breaking away from a protest march.
U.S. District Judge Richard Jones ordered their release on Wednesday, saying it was clear further time at the Federal Detention Center in Seatac wasn't going to persuade them to talk. The judge said they should be freed by 4 p.m. Thursday, and they were released at 4 p.m. on the dot, met by close friends and family, said Olejnik's lawyer, Jenn Kaplan.
"We're thrilled," Kaplan said. "It's a vindication of what our clients have been saying from the outset: that they were never going to participate in this witch hunt."
Neither Olejnik nor Duran was suspected of involvement in the vandalism, but they were subpoenaed to testify as part of the grand jury investigation. Among the buildings damaged were Niketown, several bank offices and the building that houses the Seattle branch of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Seattle police arrested several suspects, at least three of whom were convicted, and federal agents sought to find the culprits who damaged the courthouse.
A federal search warrant affidavit filed in the case was mistakenly unsealed and obtained by The Seattle Times last October. It laid out a glimpse of the case, showing that state and federal agents were watching some members of the small group of Portland anarchists even before May Day. The affidavit said investigators were tracking members as early as April 9, when they and others were observed by FBI surveillance at a Portland event.
Agents later watched the anarchists as they traveled north for the May 1 protest.
Olejnik told the grand jury that she wasn't at the protest, that she didn't know who had gone to Seattle to take part, and that no one had told her what happened during it, Kaplan said. But once the prosecutor began asking about the political beliefs of others, she clammed up — and kept quiet, even after being offered immunity.
"It was something that was just undertaken to propagate fear within the community," Kaplan said. "The idea that your friends were going to be at risk of having to testify against you or going to jail - this could happen to anybody if they happen to know someone who's suspected of a crime."
The judge found Olejnik and Duran in civil contempt of court last September and ordered them jailed. The confinement could have lasted another 13 months, but the pair only appeared to be becoming more resolute, he wrote, and further confinement appeared pointless. They could face future prosecution for criminal contempt of court.
"Whatever the merits of their choices not to testify, their demeanor has never given the court reason to doubt their sincerity or the strength of their convictions," Jones wrote.
The U.S. attorney's office in Seattle declined to comment Thursday, but issued a statement last fall saying prosecutors do not "investigate or seek to silence lawful free speech, or dissent. We do, however, investigate and enforce the law where speech crosses the line and becomes threats or acts of violence."
"We are not free to disseminate our filings regarding a grand jury matter," spokeswoman Emily Langlie wrote in an email Thursday.
Duran served two weeks in solitary confinement at the start of his detention, returned in late December and has been there ever since, the judge wrote. Olejnik served her first six days in solitary, and was returned there from Dec. 27 until at least Feb. 12.
Their physical and mental health had deteriorated, the judge said.
Ignorance is bliss I guess. Anarchists are not in groups. I love how stereotypes, evolve, like Indian and such. They are from sheer ignorance. Have a nice day.
@Bio Sphere Anarchists are not in groups? Kind of odd you say that, since they almost always end up in groups. Yet another example of why they'll always be a bad joke - from top to bottom, they violate their own supposed definition. I wonder how well they'd fare without trust funds. Beyond that, they wouldn't make it very far in true "anarchy". Not that "anarchy" could last long.. the first person that enforces their wills and desires upon another ends that pretty quick. Somalia's a pretty good example of that. Of course, little kids can't see past their trantrums.
@Bio Sphere Reading your comment below, I see I took this one slightly out of context. The issue remains, people will call themselves "anarchists", even though they don't actually follow the definition. This is the first red flag that goes up when questioning their ideals, because their very base of reasoning is faulty to begin with.
@JGalt whats faulty is when people use specific words to describe who they are. Anarchists only send up a red flag because of media attention. Tim Osman doesn't. Of course their reasoning is faulty, it isn't productive in any sense.
So I've read AND commented to some ignorant souls on here to the issues of this article....keep in mind, these 2 individuals were jailed AND put in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT FOR MONTHS because...ready...they didn't testify to what they "believed" was some associate "political beliefs" Jesus people, this isn't america anymore ! Most of you that are saying, "good they deserved it" are the first to scream "they can take my gun away" If they can jail you for not telling "what you think someone elses beliefs are" guns are your least worries ...incredible the ignorance of some people....welcome to amerika...do you have your personal copy of the "patriot act" ??
@sargerator Lastly, Mr. Know-It-All, I find it quite amusing that while you are defending and even promoting the same attitude and actions of these "anarchists", that you get upset when people don't do as you wish. If anarchists got their wish and "the system" was "taken apart", they'd be among the first to fall victim to the resulting chaos. Either that, or they'd be too quick to set up a system of their own to protect their delicate little necks.
Where did I "defend" or "promote" these "anarchists"....We're supposed to be living in America where we have certain rights as citizens but apparently we can get rid of those rights for some if the "ends justify the means".....isn't that what we were fighting against during the "cold war" ? The mean commies that would take ALL your rights away. Or is it ok because THEY didn't take YOUR rights away...you do see the hypocracy there right ?
@sargerator Still upset over getting picked last?
Being as how you like to claim facts are on your side ... do you know for a fact that they were put in solitary for the sole reason of not testifying what they "believed" was some associate "political beliefs"? They can jail you for contempt of court and many other things. You know everything, so I'm sure you knew that, too.
So if we don't "know" all the facts as you state ! Why do you want to burn them at the stake so bad ?? Back at ya ! I reference from the same article you read and from what I READ I conclude that YES, the were put in solitary confinement for NOT saying what someone elses "POLITICAL BELIEFS " are....so expalin how thats different from the gestapo, stazi or kgb...remember we had to fear them because.......These were the statements in the article !
"Neither Olejnik nor Duran was suspected of involvement in the vandalism,
"Katherine Olejnik and Matthew Duran of Olympia were found in civil contempt of court last September for declining to say what they might know about a group of black-clad Northwest anarchists"
"But once the prosecutor began asking about the political beliefs of others, she clammed up â and kept quiet, even after being offered immunity."
What part of that second and third statement do you NOT get !! They were put in solitary for not telling what they "might know" about someone elses "political beliefs"...really ! REALLY !
Explain YOUR reasoning for thinking this was a "good" idea. You do understand the constitution right ?Â
Â
@sargerator So, you admit that you're jumping to conclusions. I'll admit that I do as well. The difference is, I've known people like them and by their own (lack of) admission, they know the answers. If you bothered to read the quotes that you used, they were jailed for contempt of court, but nowhere does it say that they were put into solitary for that reason. You sure are quick to point the finger when it supports your assumptions.
I think it's a good idea because they want "anarchy", right? Even at the lengths that the law is allowed to go to, they still received a punishment and you whine and whine. Just think, if they got what they wanted, anarchy, they'd be speed bumps by now. I understand the constitution, do you?
@sargeratorYour an idiot, commrade ! sheeeze,!
And explain why ?? Because I don't think someone should be jailed in solitary for NOT telling what they think SOMEONE elses "political beliefs" are....
You think thats right ? So you have no problem with our government claiming "if the commies take over you'll loose all your rights and they can jail you for anything" and then what does our government do....explain how this is correct , I'd really like to hear your point of view since you took offense to the "commrade" statement...defend your "freedom in america" point of view...go ahead !
It is actually too bad they did not spend some time behind bars in a not so nice place. They felt is was not their duty to assist Law Enforcement. If the anarchists felt the need to smash car windows and destroy property, they deserve lots of jail time.
These two may think they are cool or smart. However hopefully when someone breaks into their home, or vandalizes their property...hopefully no one will step up and help
They are just two entitled feeling numbskulls.
Your an idiot, commrade ! sheeeze,!
I'd have given them a one way ticket to North Korea.
You mean where they do the solitary confinement as usual punishment. Ya, if thats what you think OUR government, for the people , by the people , should do then why don't you go to n korea !
I don't think they were brave at all...stubborn perhaps and irresponsible. The fact is that this "group" was under surveillance for their conduct and behavior and their later actions proved the surveillance was warranted. These two "brave" people were knowledgeable or even complicit to the situation. They have information that might have led to the resolution and levy of justice against the rest of the group. I'm guessing they choose to remain silent to protect their own involvement.
You gotta be kidding me, did you read the story ? These 2 individuals stayed in Portland while others "they may have know" MAYBE went to seattle. You serious about siding with the government that they were put in jail because they didn't want to say what "they think their friends thoughts and feelings wer" !!! You gotta be NUTZ ! This is corporate thought police mentallity....should we call you commrade, maybe enlist you with the "gestapo" , the "stasi" or maybe the "kgb"...jesus, the freedom some idiots will give up !
@honorbound Or they may have been exercising their Fifth Amendment rights?  Pesky US Constitution.
Just because they use the Constitution as a shield does not make them heros or even admirable. Many criminals use the 5th as a defense.
@sargerator Yawn. Maybe in your next post, you can link their jail time to a Masonic conspiracy. Oh, or something to do with the pyramids. This was a criminal trial, not a witch hunt or McCarthyism. Of course, you're just a teenager in heart and mind, so you'd refuse to see that no matter how it's pointed out.
galt along with a number of neaderthal thinking boobs (sorry this REALLY pisses me off) just don't get IT ! The government puts CITIZENS in solitary confinement because...get this...they don't say what they THINK is their associate POLITICAL BELIEFS ? Are you kidding me...this is macarthyism. galt and those like him do a knee jerk reaction to gun control that REALLY doesn't do much gun control ,but oh no, some "hippies" "lets burn 'm at the stake" with no fore thought that it could be the next ..macarthyism is what happened ...plain and simple. What these fools are saying, in essence, "screw the constitution for "them", ignoranance, pure ignorance !!
How is "speculating someone elses political beliefs" condoning obstruction of justice ..really REALLY ! Do I now call you macarthy....Look it up because you're obviously not old enough ! macarthyism is what happened...the thought police ! And you guys are up in arms about gun regulations ?? jesus, what sheeple !
It's not that they were "not willing to rat out friends"...they were asked what their friends "felt about subject matter" and they refused to answer....WHY...ok anybody, why...BECAUSE THEY DON"T KNOW FOR CERTAIN WHAT SOMEONE ELSE IS THINKING...jesus ! This is the thought police, this is the gestapo, stasi, kgb ! Welcome to orson welles "1984" HOLLY CRAP, I can't beleive the government put 2 people in jail for not "testifying what they "thought" friends were thinking !
macarthyism is alive and well, he would be proud !
@JGalt I'm not exactly sure why the attack at me when all I said was that they were exercising their right under the Fifth Amendment.  I said I'm no anarchist and don't support what was done in Seattle so you can back off that.  Pesky little thing about the Constitution and Bill of Rights -- you don't get to choose which ones you 'believe' in and which ones you don't -- whether a person exercises their right to remain silent doesn't prove guilt or innocence, it proves nothing more than them living as Americans.  As for you trying to insult me by somehow inferring that I live in Gresham, you're spot-on except for about 120 miles and a mountain range.  Wouldn't surprise me to learn you hail from Longview, Camas or Yakima.  Am I close?  C'mon, you can admit it, I won't tell.   Â
@JGalt There is some irony in this situation...
And you know what else is funny? The fact that these little brats are "railing against the system" because some of them are mad that "the man" is hiding behind laws, but they turn around and do the same and get all huffy when somebody calls them on it. They're just a bunch of spoiled little jerks that couldn't get anything of substance done if their lives depended on it.
Are you condoning obstructing justice or hiding information that may help in solving a crime? Let me guess.. you live in Gresham?
@JGalt You're not saying that using the rights guaranteed us under the Constitution is a bad thing, right?  I'm no anarchist and never support blatant vandalism, but I am a bit of a stickler about the Constitution.  These two people, from what I've read, weren't even AT the "riot" but refused to rat out others who might have been involved.
Two brave young people. Everybody else is just getting & spending.
Brave? For what? Getting and spending.. that's funny. It's called 'commerce' and 'trade'. You know, that's how they got their little black outfits, the gas for their vehicle, etc. Of course, it is more likely drug and trust-fund money, but it's money that they 'earned' and 'spent' either way.Â
Just because you're ignorant and angry doesn't make you right.
"Just because you're ignorant and angry doesn't make you right.", that staement goes DOUBLE for you !! When they come get you because you "associated" with others that "may have" done something wrong AND they ask you what you "think their political beliefs" are...AND you refuse BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T POSSIBLY KNOW TRUELY WHAT SOMEONE ELSES BELIEFS ARE FOR CERTAIN" then I hope YOU like solitary confinement...screw the constitution hey ! welcome to REAL government control by the corporate police !
@sargerator Corporate police? Why don't you go down to the police station and tell them all how they're owned and run by the corporations? You're a joke and your excuses are a waste of space.
Just make them one of the liable parties in the lawsuits for restitution for the damages from the rampage . . . .
If you want to stay silent, pay up!
Ya ! because they were 180 miles away when things happened...should I call you macarthy. Look up macarthyism because that , in essence , happened here. Don't tell me what you think your buddies political beliefs are, well then maybe solitary confinement should do the trick....welcome to amerika commrade !
Anarchist and the law -recipe for disasterly funny tv
Good thing there are still empty homes to squat in
I hope they get their jobs back
People are just fed up with the way this country is being run. Â This just may be the start of things to come.
"Their physical and mental health had deteriorated, the judge said."
There is a bit of good news.
@RalphCramden I don't know, I think their mental health was an issue before this all happened. Now they are back on the street acting more deteriorated.
Kudos for not giving in and providing the information they apparently wanted to hear. Â
Well, at least a couple of people not programmed by 40 years of crime-drama television shows.
A "group" of anarchists. Guess they weren't anarchists. Who cares about details, lets just throw words around.
@Bio Sphere Â
Yes, and incarcerate people because they won't name names and feed Neo-McCarthyism. Â
I love that patriot act...it makes me feel so secure. This is another case where the police state is doing the bidding of the corporations and people mean nothing.
@Agness P Weatherby
no surprise you didn't get it. how can anarchists be in a group? A. probably aren't anarchists, just troublemakers. doosh.
@Agness P Weatherby @Bio Sphere So Agness, just to be sure we understand, if you were one of the business owners who's store was trashed, you wouldn't want our police force and legal system to try to solve this case and bring the rest of the "group" to accounting? I love the "bidding of the corporations..." comment...given that most of the vandalism impacted small businesses.
It isn't cut and dried as "opinion" ...the fools on here and maybe you too think that just because of ASSOCIATION someone can be jailed ...DO YOU UNDERSTAND what they were jailed for ? They were in portland when the incident took place ...180 MILES AWAY ! not only do you want to put "facts aside"  you have NO PROBLEM with our government putting 2 people into ISOLATION for months let alone some on here who cheer that fact AND you think I have a bad attitude...you bet I DO ! And I'm NOT going to shut the "f_@* up" ! Like I said before, if you beleive this is the right of the government to treat it's citizens this way...welcome to amerika, commrade !
@sargerator Sarge...I think that someone who vandalizes public and or private property, should be prosecuted. Factual details of the story aside or pending verification, my thought stands. If no personal property was destroyed, that's great. The government has deeper pockets to repair broken windows with. All the same...when it comes time to investigate a crime and witnesses, accomplices or associates who do not cooperate and can be shown to be obstructing justice (or the pursuit of it) should also be prosecuted. Again pending further details, this appears to be what happened to these two.
As for your attitude...you don't earn any respect from me lambasting everyone who has a different opinion or understanding of the situation than you do. State your thoughts and opinions or shut the F$*# up....
"This isn't a "witch hunt" or "McCarthyism".
Ha ! You need to read about macarthy and the 50's...NOT MAYBE, you SHOULD read because your statement is completely without fact...it's BS !
honorbound...SO just to be sure, you think we should jail people for not telling the government what "THEY THINK THEIR FRIENDS POLITICAL BELIEFS ARE" You did read the article didn't you, if you did your completly ignorant to peoples right. If youi did read AND comprehend the article...well, welcome to amerika commrade macarthy !
@Dr. Rawdog Dr. Raw, thank you for the correction. It was my understanding that a number of personal vehicles and smaller businesses were also vandalized and there seems to be some conflicting reports about this. If there were other smaller business and personal property items vandalized...I'm wondering why those didn't get addressed.
No people harmed, eh? Well, then they can just stay in jail then, where they also aren't harmed.
This isn't a "witch hunt" or "McCarthyism". This is a criminal investigation, attempting to get to the bottom of real crimes.
Maybe you should grow up.
@Dr. Rawdog Â
Yes, I understand it was a protest against various authoritarian institutions.Â
@honorbound
No, I am a real life person and not a corporate fiction. Â There were no people harmed in this event.Â