http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/schumacher-loses-suit/244/ "Eco-terrorism," environmental activism and animal rights activism Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:26:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/schumacher-loses-suit/244/#comment-65653 danielle Mon, 28 May 2007 17:03:41 +0000 http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/2007/05/24/schumacher-loses-suit/#comment-65653 You really need to read the judge's order before declaring it some sort of victory. It was not. The order allowed for anyone in the future showing up to a protest - even if it was their first time, and their name is not known, to be served with the injunction. And that is exactly what happened. Every protester at the next protest - and even 2 hitchhikers from another state who were not protesters but were sitting near them - was served a restraining order. The "janes and johns" - the unnamed protesters - were in fact served and restricted. They just had to show up to get the order, rather than the judge issuing it immediately from the bench. Look at the language of the order and you'll see that it allows for this. The Oregonian was somewhat misleading, and people just took the headline as the gospel. You really need to read the judge’s order before declaring it some sort of victory. It was not. The order allowed for anyone in the future showing up to a protest – even if it was their first time, and their name is not known, to be served with the injunction. And that is exactly what happened. Every protester at the next protest – and even 2 hitchhikers from another state who were not protesters but were sitting near them – was served a restraining order. The “janes and johns” – the unnamed protesters – were in fact served and restricted. They just had to show up to get the order, rather than the judge issuing it immediately from the bench. Look at the language of the order and you’ll see that it allows for this. The Oregonian was somewhat misleading, and people just took the headline as the gospel.

]]>