“It’s the right thing to do”: Defense attorney picks up Shasta protester case pro bono, citing First Amendment concerns
Jenny O’Connell-Nowain is being charged with disturbing the peace and resisting arrest for her actions during a November 7 county board meeting. Defense attorney Michael Borges said he’s representing her free of charge because First Amendment rights are a priority.
Michael Borges has made a name for himself in Shasta County by representing some of the most high profile criminal cases that the county sees. Today, July 11, the defense attorney appeared in a busy Shasta County Superior Court department to represent Jenny O’Connell-Nowain, a local activist who’s facing misdemeanor charges of disturbing the peace and resisting arrest for her nonviolent protest during a county board meeting last November.
In front of a courtroom so packed with defendants that her supporters and husband weren’t permitted to stay to observe the hearing, O’Connell-Nowain pled not guilty to two charges filed by the Shasta County District Attorney last month.
The small, soft-spoken O’Connell-Nowain wore headphones throughout much of her time in court. She said she was able to retain Borges’ services after she was handed his card by someone who encouraged her to reach out.
The attorney told Shasta Scout he offered to pick up the case free of charge because of the importance of First Amendment protections, saying too often the pressure of the prosecution, rather than the facts of the case themselves, dictate the outcome.
Just before today’s hearing, O’Connell-Nowain said, the DA’s Office offered a deal: dropping the charges if she agreed to perform community service at an organization of her choice and “not disturb a meeting again.” She said she declined, citing among other concerns the lack of definition around the term “disturbance.”
“I can’t promise not to do something again if I never did it in the first place,” O’Connell-Nowain said, emphasizing that she believes her protest was a Constitutionally-protected action.
“I think they want to sweep this under the rug,” she continued, referring to the DA’s Office, “but I don’t think we’re going to do that.”
The DA’s Office said they could not comment on details in a case which is pending litigation.
O’Connell-Nowain’s case will return for a settlement hearing on August 11. In the interim, her lawyer said, the DA will be obligated to provide all materials that support the claim that his client violated the law.
Important factors in the case, Borges explained, include what O’Connell-Nowain was protesting at the county board meeting, how the board chair and attorney handled her protest, and whether law enforcement commands to O’Connell-Nowain were lawful, given the circumstances.
If the two sides can’t agree to a resolution on August 11, the case will likely move to a trial. That’s the goal, Borges said, explaining that he wants to see O’Connell-Nowain’s rights vindicated by a jury of her peers.
“The community needs to decide what the First Amendment means in Shasta County,” he emphasized.
“What limits and restrictions are we willing to accept on a person’s right to protest peacefully?”
Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.
Through December 31, NewsMatch is matching donations dollar-for-dollar up to $18,000, giving us the chance to double that amount for local journalism in Shasta County. Don't wait — the time to give is now!
Support Scout, and multiply your gift
Author
Comments (15)
Comments are closed.
Related Articles
Emergency supplies available for Redding residents as flood impacts continue
City officials have not yet announced how many residents and businesses are believed to have been impacted by the flooding, which they say occurred as a result of clogs in stormwater drain systems brought on by a high volume rain falling in Redding over a short period of time.
A group of community members are hoping to start a new medical school in Shasta. Here’s what we know
Redding Vice Mayor Dr. Paul Dhanuka and Simpson University President Dr. Norm Hall are some of the leading figures behind the plan.
With more rain ahead, Redding officials explain flooding, urge caution
This weekend, the city’s stormwater infrastructure became clogged with debris due to the speed and volume of rain, officials said, leading to serious flooding in parts of Redding.
Why is she talking so softly. She can scream while out protesting and talk with a normal tone of voice at previous meetings and other places, but puts on a show when the county council is around. I just think she just wants all the attention she can get by behaving like a child.
After many many disruptions by Ginny and her husband Benni this appears to be the straw that broke the camel’s back”.
Well here’s another good reason to CUT the DA budget and make them be way more selective and thoughtful about who and for what they prosecute.
Powered by Strawberry
Thank you, Jenny and Michael Borges. Maybe Jenny should have offered Crye the opportunity to do “Community Service” picking up trash along the highway instead of working as hard as he can to, quoting Crye, “turn Shasta County into the Reddest County in California,” while giving his far-right Cartel of neo-confederate, conspiracy-minded election deniers, at taxpayers’ expense, ample time and money to spread lies, propaganda, and divide Shasta County! I think the DA got it wrong. Charge the Crye-Jones-CEO Rickerd-Kelstrom MAGA Cartel for Cartel Cronyism, possible Brown Act violations, for willfully misusing taxpayer funds on Trumpian – fascist propaganda, appointments like Mr. YMCA / Secessionists Street, and 06 Insurrectionist-Tinfoil-Hatted Conspiracists-Mosquito-Man Knight, spent B.S. far outside of its legal jurisdiction! Keep it up, Jenny! I expect we’ll see more Good Trouble in the near future!
The abuse and vitreol that has been hurled at anyone at board meetings,who doesn’t agree with Kevin Crye has been incredible. It’s really been shocking. They should be arresting the people who have physically threatened anyone they don’t like. I don’t know if they’re called proud boys or not. They have threatened violence for a few years now. They follow people home and attempt to intimidate.
The circumstances surrounding this incident are indicative of our ineffective DA office and overreach by the BOS, especially Crye to keep our county dumbed down.
People threatening to arrest the board, many far rightwing folks given exceptions to the rules for speaking at board meetings, proud boy attempts at intimidation, etc. yet none reach the level of the charges filed against Jenny.
Her lawyer is correct. Free speech in Shasta county is being violated.
I spoke in defense of Leonard Moty at a Board meeting and was repeatedly interrupted by booing from the audience. The behavior then was much more disruptive and threatening than anything being done today. The thinking seems to be: threatening Moty and Rickert was free speech while irritating Crye is a crime.
“the DA’s Office offered a deal: dropping the charges if she agreed to perform community service at an organization of her choice and “not disturb a meeting again.””
And that’s exactly why she is being prosecuted despite limited DA resources – she’s done it before and has no intention of stopping because she thinks “protesting” gives her carte blanche to ignore all other laws.
Skip to ~35 minutes to judge for yourself whether her actions disrupted the meeting: https://youtu.be/uUFbT9jaqZ0
Thanks for the easy opportunity to view the disruption under discussion. From what I see in the video link you offered, Jenny’s brief interuption of the meeting was far less egregious than many disruptions that have occurred in the past. And once she was quietly sitting on the floor, I don’t consider that to be disrupting the meeting going forward in any way. As far as I know, none of the disruptors at previous meetings were arrested and charged with anything. So I think it’s worth pondering why the response by the board of Supervisors varies so greatly.
I’d be happy if other incorrigible disrupters were charged as well.
As for sitting on the floor, I’d agree with you if she hadn’t been holding a sign blocking the audience’s view of the board (and the board’s view of the audience). See https://ibb.co/tM5H8J19 for a sitting audience member’s eye-level view (the video you saw earlier was from the height of someone standing at the back/side of the room).
McMahon v. Albany Unified School District offers a legal precedent. There courts ruled that a speaker dumping a mound of trash before the board substantially impaired that its ability to conduct a meeting because “audience members would have been forced to peer over a mound of garbage in order to watch a public body perform its duty.”
The forefathers of this nation decided that “Protesting” was freedom of speech and fought against tyranny for that right.
If time travel was a thing, I know what side you would be on. And it wouldn’t be on the side of democracy.
Silly, but thank you for using the word “pled” not “pleaded” which just seems wrong.
The problem for the DA is that the board of supervisors hasn’t been consistent in how they have handled so-called “disruptive” speakers.
Instead, they have selectively chosen who is “disruptive”, and who is not.
Par for the course in Shasta County. The DA over charges, then they offer a plea. If you have ever been in a courtroom for misdemeanor arraignments, you know what she means about it being crowded. MOST of those cases should not even be prosecuted. The funny thing is they have no intent on going to trial against any of those poor souls. They will offer pleas to each and every one of them. Public defenders will recommend defendants take the pleas, because they are part of the scheme. Nobody wants to go to a trial. The DA’s know that their evidence is shotty or just plain not there, and that they would likely lose any trail to a moderately competent attorney.