Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Facebook "friending" lands activist Rod Coronado in prison
Posted by Matthew Frank on Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:29 PM
Animal rights and environmental activist Rod Coronado finds himself in federal prison for becoming a “friend” with part-time Missoula resident and Earth First! co-founder Mike Roselle on Facebook.
In a federal court document (PDF) dated July 14, 2010, U.S. Probation Officer Rhonda J. Wallock claimed that Coronado, convicted of felony conspiracy in 2006, violated the special conditions of his court-ordered supervision.
“In monitoring Mr. Coronado’s Facebook account,” Wallock wrote, “this officer found Michael Roselle to be a ‘friend’ of Mr. Coronado. According to FBI intelligence and a criminal history investigation of Michael Roselle, he is a well-known environmental activist who has a history of condoning direct action and violence as a means of protest or demonstration.”
Wallock believes being Roselle’s “friend” violated the first condition of Coronado’s supervision—not associating with activists who have a history of violence or condoning violence, including but not limited to those involved with Earth First!, the Earth Liberation Front and the Animal Liberation Front.
“I sent him a friend request because someone had suggested that I friend him,” Roselle says from West Virginia, where he’s working to stop mountaintop removal operations, “and given that I’ve known Rod for quite a while, I did. I guess he hit the accept button.”
Coronado also violated the terms of his supervision by using a computer unauthorized and unmonitored by Wallock.
Wallock wrote: "This officer found Facebook posts from March 14, April 27, and May 3, 2010, showing Mr. Coronado utilized a computer or computer related device to post information on Facebook. According to computer monitoring records, Mr. Coronado’s monitored computer had no data recorded from February 8 to May 10, 2010. In March 2010, Mr. Coronado advised this officer that his computer had crashed and that he was no longer using or accessing the monitored computer."
On August 3, U.S. District Judge Paul Maloney, of the Western District of Michigan, sentenced (PDF) Coronado to four months in prison.
“Guilt by association, that’s not really part of our legal system,” Roselle says. “This is a flagrant constitutional violation, if you ask me. And then it really brings up the question, What is an ‘association’?”
Comments (36)
Showing 1-36 of 36
The comment that I have supported violence is not based on fact. The FBI knows this and I have been under an active investigation for some time. I have never been charged with, or have been investigated for a violent crime. Direct action is not a violent crime. Rodney has paid his debt to society and has stated his commitment to non violent change. To portray this as a criminal association violates both of our constitutional rights.
like
dislike
The greater crime is the court's unproven assumption of guilt by association based on its apparent bias that personal communications for political activism is unconstitutional. Next we can expect the return of the inquisition and sentencing for thought crimes eh? What happened to the role of the courts in defending the constitution? Roselle should sue the judge for character assassination. M\\
The courageous defense of all life and the resistance of oppression are not violence. The federal government and animal exploitation industries continue peddling the Green Scare to preserve profits at the expense of the animals, the people, and the earth. At great hardship to himself personally, Rod has stood against injustice his entire life.
Let's be clear. Violence originates from individuals and organizations that destroy life and this earth. I'm grateful our world still has strong individuals who refuse to be complicit to such true violence.
EatMeat, if you want to start a logical debate over this, I'd advise you not to lower yourself to name calling and statements based on your own subjective reasoning.
But none of that matters, I guess, since your chosen name immediately identifies you as a troll.
If Rod was convicted of pedophilia and befriended a child on an unmonitored computer, would the reactions be the same?
Sorry to say but this was a condition of his release. It's not like he's a sparkling example of society, he's a convicted criminal. He should consider running for political office.
"Rodney has paid his debt to society..."
No, he has not. He was released early with conditions. He violated those conditions. It's very simple, logical, legal, and reasonable. People who violate the persons and property of those with whom they don't agree need to be isolated from society.
Let's look at the "crime" for which Rod was initially convicted; he was never charged with damaging any property, not committing any acts of violence. He gave a lecture at a university in California during which he discussed the tactic of properry destruction in the context of the battle against urban sprawl and harmful development. That same evening an obscene building was destroyed by arsonists and blame was ascribed to an environmental action group with which Coronado had some association in the past. There was never a direct connection established and Coronado, in his speech never directly advocated such actions.
Regardless of whether you feel property destruction actions are justifiable, effective, or wise, that's simply not the point. Coronado was convicted on scant circumstantial "evidence" - not even that, really, and is being further penalized for the slightest infraction of his parole - an act which posed no threat what so ever.
look at all the sheeple authoritarian slave-system loving ******* - what a joke of an education systems produced you guys in the former "land of the free" - go suck up some more to corrupt police and politicians - they'll never get tired of hearing it from the "useful idiot" crowd that infests and infects this nation like a cancer. You do realize you're cheering on someone who - oh gosh - clicked a button on a website. You all shouldn't have to worry though, you'll do whatever you're told and condemn those of us that see this entire global gulag for what is is - and we will never ever bow down and lick it's boots like you are all to glad and proud to do. Disgusting excuses for human beings that you are, more like cattle.
Roko, ok I'll play. Yes, Lets look at the crimes which he was INITIALLY Convicted of.
1986 - Sinking of 2 whaling ships, 2 million in damages
1995 - 57 Month Conviction of Arson at MSU
2005 - Convicted of conspiracy against a Govt official/Destruction of Gov't property
2008 - Convicted of conspiracy to commit acts of violence
STELLAR record. I see all sorts of comments about his 1st amendment rights, But those rights don't exist to the point of inciting riot. You might want to re-read the full 1st amendment again.
The Basic laws of the land stem from the premise that it is unlawful to harm another person and/or their property. Seems as Rod had no problem doing just that. So after so many attempts to change his mentality of willingly breaking laws, it's come down to more prison time. I guess some people just refuse to learn to play well with others.
It's "illegal" for Palestinians to access their own water supplies. It is "illegal" for Palestinians to collect RAINWATER in areas of the Occupied Territories, just as at one time, it was "illegal" for Jews to appear in public without a yellow star affixed to their arm.
To make illegality under patently unjust systems the sine qua non of acceptable behavior is basically to support Nazism.
It is considered a violation of parole to associate with other known criminals. People constantly go back to prison for this kind of violation. I see no difference in associating via Facebook than I do in associating via phone or mail.
And it was "legal" in your stupid society to own black humans as slaves until 150 years or so ago. When humans stop exploiting each other, the environment and non-human animals, maybe then we should start considering obeying their irrelevant laws. Sorry you have to spend a little more time in their cage, Rod; maybe its time to start fighting them again when you get out.
Jerry Vlasak, MD
Press Officer
North American Animal Liberation Press Office
www.animalliberationpressoffice.org
It is not surprising that a state whose history is voluminous catalogue of atrocities, which gleefully tramples fundamental human rights law underfoot and revels in unending aggression around the world, should imprison Coronado for this fearsome Facebook crime. The point has been made above: those who exhibit an astonishingly slavish veneration for 'the law', howeevr oppressive and arbitrary, reveal in themselves a really terrifiying strain of authoritarianism. they are not appreciably different from their forebears who happily conformed to socially permissible iniquities in the past.
Long live the spirit of iconoclasm that animates Coronado and others who refuse to worship prevailing mores. They are the heirs of Thoreau, Garrison and Douglas. The state apparatus that persecutes them really is the coldest of cold monsters.
There is NO LAW, period. BP is guilty of negligent terracide and Goldman Sachs walked away with EVERYBODY'S money. Don't blather at me about "law" and "consequences." That's a load of crap.
ron in dallas,
I have something for you to read (you can read right?).
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/201…
have a nice day...
Observer,
You're comparing a violation of release to the founder of Wikileaks?
Spare me that lame example. READ the conditions of Rod's release. Did he violate them? yes. Beyond that is irrelavant. Stick to the topic at hand. This story isn't about Martyrs, it's not about saving animals. It's a simple violation of conditions of release.
Here's a nice quick definition for you - insanity:
Insanity is performing the same actions time and time again and expecting a different result. - Albert Einstein
I share the sentiment of those who have raised the observation of the slavish pro-authoritarianism of those posters who want to lock someone up on an insane basis.
Yes obeying reasonable laws like not drinking and driving makes total sense and is just
human decency toward others. But laws that maintain systems of pillage and destruction,
enslavement and state sanctioned violence should never be obeyed.
Howard Simon Marks www.howardsimonmarks.com
Manchester UK
Lock him up and throw away the key.
It's time that environmentalism threw off the shackles off the commerical animal protest industry and their wing-nut groupies.
Rod Coranado is a sanctimonious Terrorist and his buddy Jerry Vlasak (MD?) advocates murdering humans.
Thanks but environmentalism has been hijacked by this type of clown for three decades now.
It's time the animal nutters were thrown overboard. They're dead weight.
I see that the extremists have turned out in support of their friend again.
Vlasak and company, you can all complain about how the law is unfair and try to use that to justify violence against those who happen to disagree with you, but you don't convince me. The USA has plenty of democratic and legal avenues through which you can pursue your campaigns, that you fail to do so is indicitive of the fact that you are aware that there is very little popular support for your position.
You like to portray yourselves as freedom-fighters, but you are really no better than the scum who bomb abortion clinics and murder abortion providers. They too believe that they have no choice due to the way democratic society works.
The only shame in this story is that Coronado will be out again in four months.
"People who violate the persons and property of those with whom they don't agree need to be isolated from society." posted by Lawyer.
Hear hear !
Civil Libertarian
'People who violate the persons and property of those with whom they don't agree need to be isolated from society'. posted by LAWYER.
Hear Hear . There are many 'Animal Rights' thugs hiding under the 'conservation' umbrella of respectability who believe they can do as they please,stalk intimidate, threaten, abuse , kill, maim, they are scum of the earth low life criminals ,the law will catch up with them all in due course.
'People who violate the persons and property of those with whom they don't agree need to be isolated from society'. posted by LAWYER.
Obviously, application of this dictum would put our entire national leadership behind bars, for orchestrating attacks against those with whom they disagree--to the tune of millions of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars in property damage. Alongside such terrorists, people in the environmental movement resorting to violence are strictly minor league.
In short, 'lawyer' doesn't really believe in justice. Like most in his profession, he believes in law as a weapon of the strong to be used against the weak.
'In short, 'lawyer' doesn't really believe in justice. Like most in his profession, he believes in law as a weapon of the strong to be used against the weak.'
Rykart is over reacting. The issue here is an AR criminal I believe, not governments or any other body we have issues with. Criminals need to be dealt with by the law and jailed for their crimes. AR appears to be a cover for criminal behaviour on a grand scale. Conservation organisations may appear benign until you scratch the surface to find organised crime, fraud, intimidation,attempted murder, removal of civil liberties for victims and gutless cowardarly intimidatory tactics.Conservation groups are basically a law unto themselves who continue to fraudulently fleece a gullible public and who should be fully investigated.
"Conservation organisations may appear benign until you scratch the surface to find organised crime, fraud, intimidation,attempted murder, removal of civil liberties for victims and gutless cowardarly intimidatory tactics."
--Civil Libertarian
Evidence? Zero.
But I'm "overreacting"?!?
In any case, the issue is far from cut and dried. We cannot as a society, allow individuals to freely decide what they believe is or is not within the law, or society devolves into anarchy. Nevertheless, history shows that unless individuals and groups challenge and occasionally break laws that are manifestly unjust, there is no progress. Blacks sitting at white lunch counters were law breakers. The anti-apartheidists of South Africa were law breakers (and, according to the US, they were also "terrorists", those refusing to participate in America's Nazi-esque genocide in Indochina were and ARE considered criminals, while the real criminals—vermin like John McCain, prowl the country bragging about their vile exploits.
You refer to those engaged in direct action, like Coronado interfering with whaling vessels or people clubbing seals to death as "cowardly." Maybe you ought to give it a try and see if you reach the same conclusion based on experience.
Again, as to the topic of mega-scale criminals, as a 'civil libertarian' you might enjoy the article featured in this week's New Yorker Magazine on the Koch brothers--a pair of multibillionaire thugs who are the primary funders of the tea party movement.
Rykart,
Stick to the topic.
This is a VERY simple story or Rod violating the conditions of his release.
It's not about other countries, it's not about John McCain. hell, it's not even about fighting for one's beliefs against a repressive Gov't. Yes, the system is broken. But that fact doesn't automatically grant you Carte blanche
to do as you please because you have an "excuse". You don't like the laws? CHANGE THEM. But until they are changed, OBEY THEM.
The way this works out is if laws like this aren't obeyed and enforced, Gov't will make new laws, they won't enforce those either and people won't obey them.
Gov't will have to make more money to claim they're going to enforce them so everyone gets hammered with new taxes or money taken from other programs. People will complain that the problem still exists, even more laws are created ad nauseum. This story very simply is a case where Rod did not obey the law and it's being enforced. You should be rejoicing that the Gov't is actually doing what we elected them to do.
Well written post and to the point Ronindallas. Rykart there is a lot of 'evidence' the 'evidence' grows day by day the 'evidence' is being documented you can count on it . The authorities will be looking closely at AR activists you can count on that too . This Coronardo guy seems to have taken the law into his own hands as AR activists do because AR activists think they can do what they want when it involves their self righteous 'we love all animals so naturally were all good guys' fascade , now he faces the consequences of his actions as it should be.
"This story very simply is a case where Rod did not obey the law and it's being enforced."
..just as those who sheltered Jews during the Nazi era had to "face the consequences of breaking the law." You don't have a problem with that, do you?
The point here is that you disagree with the aims of the AR movement, whereas in other cases, you might be more supportive. For example, the case of Wikileaks. You may agree that whistle-blowing to expose govt criminality serves the public good and ought to be supported. It is ALSO against the law and is being vigorously prosecuted, so that the government can continue to effectively hide the truth of these wars from the public. Either whistle-blowers will find the courage and break the law, or the government will continue to rape, torture and brutalize and keep these facts in the shadows.
You want to reduce the issue to something very simple. It's not simple. If it were, we'd all be in agreement.
Rykart,
The problem with your arguement and comparison to the Jews is simple.
Rod AGREED to the conditions. Now before you say this was a coerced agreement ( either agree or go to jail) this is a common plea-bargaining technique. Both Rod and his lawyer agreed it that it would be acceptable. Rod then used another computer to communicate with others that he was prohibited from contacting. I know how social networking works and it was no secret in the AR community that he was convicted and his sentance was that he was unable to communicate with his previous group of friends.
So lets keep this simple. Is the story about:
Jews in concentration camps? NO
Animal rights activists? NO
How the earth is getting too hot because of man? NO
Republicans? NO
Democrats? NO
Green Party? NO
A Man fighting injustices of society? NO
The story is about (pay attention this time) a Man who violated the conditions of his release. Nothing more fantastic than that.
Is there a reason why you can't follow that? I mean I understand the premise of rights for animals, etc, but that has nothing, not a damned thing to do with this story. If you want a soap box, go make one on your own. Then you can say whatever makes your heart go pitter patter.
Hi Ron
I notice you're getting a little hot under the collar. This often happens when people realize their arguments aren't on very solid ground. (Granted, living in Dallas doesn't generally promote clarity of thought either :)
The case really has to do with government efforts to harass, intimidate and silence dissent. This they do a lot of. Someone here mentioned the Wikilinks case as one of endless examples but you can't respond, (though the government's efforts to shut people up, based on some generally laughable pretense are quite similar).
Since the Patriot Act, the government has very broad measures at its disposal to silence people and it uses these more and more routinely. You see this as a wonderful thing, I don't.
The intent of the government is critical here. Is the intent to prevent crime or is the intent to silence opinions we may not like and prevent individuals from organizing? From your arguments, you should have no problem whatsoever with laws in places like China that prevent free assembly and demonstration. That is exactly the sort of system you are arguing for.
As things are going, you may get your wish.
PS
Before another reflex-endorsement of our matchless system of justice, ponder this:
"There is no freestanding right not to be framed."
Let that sink in a bit.
It means that a prosecutor can know that you are completely innocent of any crime. He can manufacture evidence to frame you and put you away for LIFE or even get you sentenced to the death penalty and there is no law to protect you from this. The prosecutor who does this HAS NOT BROKEN THE LAW!
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p…
You will say again no doubt that this has no applicability to the Coronado case, but naturally, it does. A system this corrupt and diseased should have its activities closely and critically scrutinized and should not be accepted as having society's best interests in mind at face value.
Another highly related example is the innocent people we are starting to release from our various torture chambers around the world. Such release typically comes with a written declaration that these people not talk to the press or publish anything regarding their treatment in captivity. They can either sign it or stay in places like Guantanamo and rot.
The government will claim that they "endanger national security" if they speak of their own ordeals. They will re-arrest them and throw them back in our dungeons for more torture.
This is a far more extreme example than what is happening to Coronado, though the underlying principle is very much the same. To say that the government is legally on firm footing in re-imprisoning Coronado might be true. Sure--an utterly corrupt system can indeed use force to get its way. If that's what we're arguing about--you win. But I don't see how this is cause for celebration, any more than the (perfectly legal) crackdown in Tiananmen Square.
Rykart,
I'm not getting hot under the collar. You're doing everything you can to deviate from the story topic. Do I agree the system is Broken? ABSOLUTELY. But that doesn't mean you can choose which laws apply to you and which don't. Breaking the laws doesn't fix them, it makes you a law breaker. Rod was given specific conditions. He agreed to these stipulations then violated them. I can't feel sorry for him. HOW many times have we heard that ignornace is no excuse of the law. He doesn't even have that as a crutch to use. He violated the conditions of his release. He was sent back to prison. End of story. Stick a fork in it, it's done. Nothing to see here folks, move along. Save all your " it's just the man tryin to keep a brutha down" diatribes to yourself. It doesn't play into this. Do you REALLY want to help him? pay his lawyer who also agreed that the conditions of his release were acceptable. (or find him a better one)
Ron..I don't agree.
Maybe for YOU the story's topic is whether Coronado violated the terms of his release. I find that aspect of the story banal and beside the point.
For the record, I don't endorse Coronado's approach to AR, because I believe it does harm to the cause he supports. That said, I defend Coronado here from what I see as yet another blatant and unambiguous example of overzealous prosecution aimed at intimidation, stifling of public debate and curtailment of individual rights.
I also vehemently disagree with this statement:
"Breaking the laws doesn't fix them, it makes you a law breaker."
History again and again shows otherwise.
There is always a legitimate question as to whether a given lawbreaker is a villain or a hero.
That question has relevance in the Coronado case just as it has relevance in the case of THESE lawbreakers.
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/214367-I…
My vote? They are heroes.
Coronado? I'm less sure, but I certainly feel this use of prosecutorial resources and power is at the very least, heavy-handed and at worst, corrupt and reprehensible. It hasn't much to do with my support or lack of support for his political opinions.
Solarwriter,
did you actually READ the PDF or are you going solely by what the story reports?
In order not to do jail time, He AGREED to the conditions of release. Well, he violated those conditions and off to jail he goes. He ADMITTED that he violated the conditions. Stop trying to make this guy a Martyr. He screwed up. He was at least honorable enough to admit it and is man enough to handle the consequences for it. Respect the man for that, not his poor choice in associations.
I agree with everyone who stated Rod did not live up to the agreement he made. He knew it when he signed it. If you go on to his support page his wife talked about the conditions. Here's the thing, Rod has a family, he knew he was doing something that could send him back to do some more time, he made that choice. Rod KNEW having access to an unmonitored computer could cause him some problems and he did it. Now you are crying foul? Come on! He knew the risk he was taking and he took it. Why? Having a face book page and using an unmonitored computer was more important than being there for his kids, that doesn't sound very mature at all. What he has done on behalf of the animals and the earth are definitely admirable, but come on, you risk taking your support away from your family? What kind of man does that? And yes, I do know. My husband just did 14 years and has been out 4 . He had conditions and he did not deviate from them. He wouldn't do that to our life. He would not have done that to our family. Not even to prove how ridiculous those condition were. In my opinion Rod needs to stay in prison and max out his time so he is done with the system and can be there for that family he cares so much about. You can sit and pout about this one person being picked on but this is not a system set up just to ruin poor Mr. Coronado, it ruins many lives and keeps taking them everyday. 4 months for not following your conditions? Give me a break! He needs to grow up.
Twitter
Facebook
RSS