10 activists or terrorists? Judge weighs arguments.

Byline: Bill Bishop The Register-Guard

Politics played no role in prosecutors' efforts to label as "terrorists" the 10 co-conspirators charged with using arson to punish what they perceived as animal cruelty and environmental degradation, Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephen Peifer told a federal judge on Tuesday.

Politics played a big role in the government's decision to brand the defendants as "terrorists" after they were arrested in the nation's largest investigation of radical underground environmental activists, defense lawyers insisted.

Politics or no politics, U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken told the lawyers that her decision on whether their crimes amount to terrorism will be an exercise in applying statutes, not in applying labels.

Acknowledging the complexity of her task, Aiken said her ruling may not answer every question about the terrorism issue in every one of the defendants' cases in advance of their individual sentencing hearings. Instead, she indicated her ruling is likely to provide a basic framework for her to consider the issue in each case.

If Aiken finds the federal terrorist statute applies to property crimes against government or private property, it could increase each defendant's potential sentence four- to sixfold. However, prosecutors are not asking for extra time and are adhering to previous plea bargains with recommended sentences from almost 16 years to a little more than three years.

Under federal law, Aiken has broad discretion in deciding a sentence for each, regardless of any plea deal or even her own ruling on whether the extra terrorism penalty could be applied.

Six of the 10 defendants and about 80 spectators jammed Aiken's courtroom as the five-hour hearing began with Peifer outlining the government's arguments.

He focused on the plain wording of plea deals in which the co-conspirators admitted they intended "to influence or affect the conduct of government" or to retaliate against government action - one of the facts required for a crime to be terrorism under federal law.

While the defendants "attempted to sanitize their motives" with "proclamations of lofty humane goals," their crimes were "the essence of terrorism," Peifer said.

Although defense lawyers contend that the terrorism law is intended only for criminals who target people and not property, Peifer said the federal terrorism statute does not require proof of a substantial risk of injury or death in crimes committed by the group.

He noted that incendiary devices were placed next to a large propane tank in one arson and next to a building's natural gas line in another.

"It was pure luck no one was killed or injured by their actions," he said.

Peifer struck a nerve among defense lawyers when he said the defendants' legal argument would exempt the Ku Klux Klan from a charge of terrorism if the white supremacist group burned Southern churches without harming anyone.

The comparison was an "insult" to people of color and all who suffered or died in civil rights-era violence, defense lawyer Amanda Lee told the judge.

Lee, who represents defendant Daniel McGowan, said the Klan espoused lynchings, beatings, arson and brutal intimidation, while environmental activists have constantly vowed nonviolence and have taken steps to prevent injury in their actions. No one was injured in any of the acts by the conspirators, she said.

She noted that the government's sentencing recommendations don't change, even if Aiken rules that the terrorism statute applies.

"That doesn't mean this issue is not profoundly important," Lee told the judge. "It's about who these defendants are. It's about what terrorism means in these troubled times. It's about whether we still know the difference."

Defense lawyer Bill Sharp, representing Joyanna Zacher, focused on the testimony and statements of House and Senate members who formulated the terrorism law as the law evolved since the mid-1990s.

"The people they were trying to get ... were the people who were killing people," Sharp told Aiken. "Terrorism is about killing people. It is not possible for anyone to read this history and come up with a different conclusion."

Aiken's eventual ruling will first come into play Tuesday, at a sentencing

hearing scheduled for Stanislas Meyerhoff. He faces the longest recommended sentence, 15 years and eight months.

The 10 sentencing hearings wrap up with Jonathan Paul on June 5. He is charged with conspiracy and one count of arson.