Friday morning – early start. Bryan gave his testimony from the witness stand. He spoke of the transparency with which they had acted and tended a letter to the police explaining what they would be doing.
He was allowed to tender some documents that referred to the role of Pine Gap not on the basis of their veracity but on the basis that they contributed to the forming of his beliefs.
Bryan ended with an exploration of lawbreaking as an honourable deed. Bryan reminded the jury that Jesus had led a movement of law breakers – they had crossed caste and ethnic and religious social boundaries: Jesus had eaten with ‘sinners’ and women and touched the woman who was bleeding.
More legal argument/objections
It had been agreed that he would be then cross-examined by the other three defendants and by the crown. However, Mr Dembo for the prosecution began to request again that the judge make a ‘ruling’ on whether she would allow a defence argument to go to the jury under 10.3, 10.4 and 10.5 in the Commonwealth criminal code. These sections – acting because of extreme emergency, acting because of self defence, or acting because of some other lawful authority. The Judge said that the defendants could have a few more days to prepare the legal arguments in relation to these codes. But also allowed Mr Dembo to reserve his cross-examination until after the others give their testimony.
Jim began his case and outlined how he came to develop a perspective that he should act at Pine Gap over the years leading up to the act. Jim played a video that was an example of how his mind/beliefs had been formed.
He also spoke of how he surfed the net for information about the war in Iraq. He told how he had come across video footage of children killed in bombing raids in the early parts of the Iraq war. He talked about how he had repeatedly rung the terrorism hotline to report on Pine Gap.
Early start – Early finish for the day!
Adele’s opening statement was eloquent and clear. She outlined that she would be arguing under international law. – International humanitarian law – that the PG facility was involved in international war crimes and crimes against humanity.
She quoted the Nuremberg principles. “Preparation for war is itself a war crime”. “Murder, extermination, and other acts against a civilian population when in connection to a war situation” [paraphrased]. “States must never make civilians a target or use weapons that cannot distinguish between civilians and other combatants.”
Adele’s opening was interrupted by the prosecution but she will continue on Tuesday.
Donna told the jury about the irony of the prosecutor’s statement that this is just a criminal act of trespass and the use of a camera. But Donna said that the fact that they are the first people to be arrested under the Defence Special Undertakings Act and the fact that they are facing 7 years in prison and not a $50 fine is an indication that this case is not just about trespass and the use of a camera.
It’s much more than trespass and the use of a camera.
She also highlighted in her opening several times that there’s more evidence that they want to give the jury but they are not allowed to; that her testimony is limited by the ‘bevy’ of lawyers appearing for the commonwealth.
She finished by reminding the jury that her mother thought it was reasonable!
We held a small procession from the court back to the Uniting Church to end the week. We walked single file back to the mall to the slow beat of a drum. We then made 4 statements about the connection between Pine Gap and war and conducted a ‘die in’. This die in links us with other nonviolence and peace activists across the world who have done die ins.
Boom Boom Boom Boom
Pine Gap was established in 1967. It was said that Pine Gap was built for “space research”. It was a lie.
For 40 years Pine Gap has orchestrated the U.S. war of aggression.
Pine Gap is a weapon of mass destruction.
What have you done? Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the earth.