by Patrick H. Moore
America was once a proud and free land, or so the story goes. Now, however, we are turning into a whiny, officious bunch of corporate crybabies, or so the case of Jeff Olson, the 40 year old “chalk activist”, strongly suggests. Jeff was charged with 13 counts of vandalism for scrawling anti-megabank messages on sidewalks in water-soluble chalk last year and now faces a 13-year prison sentence, or so numerous news agencies have reported.
Jail and Prison Exposure
Before we delve further into this case, let’s discuss the peculiar notion the Olson could get 13 years in prison for scrawling chalk slogans on the sidewalk. This claim that the news services are bandying about is not accurate, and is set forth — at least in part — to paint a picture of a system gone mad. So where does the 13 years come from? It is derived from the fact that Olson has been charged with 13 misdemeanor vandalism counts. Each vandalism count carries a maximum sentence of one year in county jail. By “stacking” the 13 counts; i.e., piling them up one atop the other like a set of building blocks, you could in theory get to 13 years. However, if the jury finds Olson guilty, and they very well may, I would be shocked if Judge Shore — who sounds like a real piece of work — gives him very much time. The babbling about 13 years is pure hyperbole, puffery to gain and incite readers.
But, let’s say I’m totally wrong and the judge does give Jeff Olson 13 years, or even gives him 5 years. What happens then? Does Olson go to the state penitentiary? Until recently, any convicted individual in California sentenced to over a year of incarceration headed off to the
State Penitentiary kmown colloquially as the “joint”. This all changed, however, based on California State Assembly Bill, AB 109, which was signed into law in October of 2011 by Jerry Brown. The measure, which was designed to alleviate over-crowding at California state prisons, ends the shuttling of low-level offenders into and out of the state prison system. Under AB 109, non-serious, non-violent, non-sexual felony offenders will do their time in their local county jail systems rather than at state penitentiaries. No one is yet quite sure what constitutes a “non-serious, non-violent, non-sexual felony,” but I can guarantee you that Jeff Olson’s 13 county of vandalism fall into that category. Yep, Jeff Olson is not going to state prison even if he is convicted of all 13 misdemeanor counts.
Olson’s trial began on Wednesday and the jury went out on Friday.
The Case Against Olson
The chain of events that ultimately led to the charges being filed against Olson began on October 3, 2011, when he first appeared outside a Bank of America branch location in San Diego, along with a homemade sign. Shortly thereafter, Olson and his partner, Stephen Daniels, while making preparations for National Bank Transfer Day, a consumer activism initiative seeking to convince Americans to switch from commercial banks, like Bank of America, to not-for-profit credit unions, were confronted by Darell Freeman, V.P. of Bank of America’s Global Corporate Security.
Displaying a knack for creative license, Freeman, a former police officer, accused Olson and Daniels of “running a business outside of the bank,” evidently in reference to their National Bank Transfer Day activities.
At the time, Bank of America’s debit card fees were one of the triggers that led Occupy Wall Street members to promote the transfer day.
“It was just an empty threat,” says Olson of Freeman’s accusations. “He was trying to scare me away. To be honest, it did at first. I even called my bank and they said he couldn’t do anything like that.”
Olson overcame his initial trepidation and continued to protest outside of Bank of America. In February 2012, having come across a box of chalk at a local pharmacy, he decided to begin spreading the message with written statements.
“I thought it was a perfect way to get my message out there. Much better than handing out leaflets or holding a sign,” says Olson.
Over the course of the next six months, Olson visited the Bank of America branch on around 50 occasions, leaving behind scribbled slogans such as “Stop big banks” and “Stop Bank Blight.com.”
Olson reported to local broadcaster KGTV that one Bank of America branch claimed it had spent $6,000 to clean up the chalk writing.
Freeman was like a pit bull crunching into a bone. He pressured members of San Diego’s Gang Unit on behalf of Bank of America until the matter was forwarded to the City Attorney’s office. Finally, on August 15th of this year, Deputy City Attorney Paige Hazard contacted Freeman:
“I wanted to let you know that we will be filing 13 counts of vandalism as a result of the incidents you reported,” said Hazard.
The Right to Free Speech Does Not Exist in Chalk Graffiti Cases
According to the San Diego Reader, on the eve of the trial. Judge Shore ruled that Olson’s attorney must refrain from “mentioning the First Amendment, free speech, free expression, public forum, expressive conduct, or political speech during the trial.” Furthermore, there is a gag order in place.
In addition to facing jail time, Olson is liable for fines of up to $13,000 for chalking the anti-big-bank slogans with washable children’s chalk on a sidewalk outside of three San Diego, California branches of Bank of America. It is noted that BOA is the massive conglomerate that received $45 billion in interest-free loans from the US government in 2008-2009 in a bid to keep it solvent after the real estate market foundered and the country slipped into recession.
Upon exiting the courtroom after learning that his First Amendment rights to free speech had been cast aside by the misguided judicial ruling, Olson seemed to be in disbelief:
“Oh my gosh,” he said. “I can’t believe this is happening.”
His lawyer Tosdal seemed equally bewildered:
“I’ve never heard that before, that a court can prohibit an argument of First Amendment rights,” he said.
Olson, who worked as a former staffer for a US Senator from Washington state, was said to involve himself in political activism in tandem with the growth of the Occupy Wall Street movement.
Closing arguments were made Friday and jurors are currently deliberating the case.