From: wasg@rice.edu (Eric Salituro)
Subject: Re: Houston Defending Choice Coalition needs you
Followup-To: houston.general,tx.general,tx.politics
Organization: Rice University Computer Science
Distribution: tx
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 23:57:38 GMT

In article <Btypy9.J8y@rice.edu>, gamble@owlnet.rice.edu (Ben Gamble)
wrote:
> 
> In article <mumble> ak45ldp@Texaco.com (Larry D. Pyeatt) writes:
> ||> They never cover the physical abuse the OR people have suffered at the hands 
> ||> of police.
> |
> |Huh?  I was not aware that any OR people suffered any abuse.  However, some 
> |have been known to resist arrest, and they did abuse some of the clinic 
> |defenders.
> 
> I'm with you, this is the first I've heard of it.  Documentation,
> Patrick?
>
I saw the OR people as they were arrested. They were not abused in any way.
They refused to move or walk, so police picked them up and carried them off
in stretchers. That is about the cushiest way to get arrested.

However, I have talked to victims of some of these people who utimately get
arrested, and they were definitely assaulted. I have heard that one
defender suffered a concussion after being knocked to the ground by one of
the Lambs.

> ||> But let's be realistic.  The papers and cameras are always there to cover 
> ||> anything that is controversial.  John is right that if there were violence 
> ||> going on as a rule, the news would pick it up.
> |
> |Would they?  I think that this issue is so controversial that the media is
> |afraid to show anything that might be construed as taking sides.  They leave
> |out a lot of information.  However, about 40 arrests were made during the
> |Republican convention.  Surely you don't think that they were arrested for
> |peaceful demonstration.
> 
> Actually, most if not all of the arrests during the convention were
> indeed for nothing more than violating the ("100ft") restraining order
> (and yes, my sources include eyewitnesses).  But that doesn't mean
> assaults aren't occurring, just that making assault charges stick is
> hard, whereas picking up injunction violators is easy.  Did OR or
> Lambs get nailed for assault at Fannin?

Actually, most if not all of the arrests (on both sides) were for criminal
trespass. However, I think it is not too unfair to characterized the media
as interested in covering confrontations. The OR and Lambs that assaulted
people will have charges filed against them in due time.

> |I really don't think that the media is on either side.
> 
> I thought this too, until one of the site coordinators pointed out to
> me as we were watching Carlos Aguilar's coverage that Channel 13 has a
> subtle and well-camouflaged, but definite, pro-life bias.
> 

I think that your subtle and well-camouflaged bias may be imposed by
someone other than Carlos Aguilar. I and others have talked to him about
the problems at West Loop, and it was never his intent to break through the
lines. I understand video of the incident coroborates his statements.
Carlos has maintained a cordial and at times very cooperative relationship
with HDC, and I think it is a little unfair to characterize him as pro-life
on the basis of some rumors.

I agree that his tactics as a journalist may be unpleasant or distasteful,
but it isn't because he is picking on pro-choicers. 

If anything, it is the attempt to be neutral that sometimes annoys me. The
clinic defenders were the ones preserving the right to choice and do
business unimpeded and we are the ones obeying the law. I would have no
problems with the media portraying us as "good guys." It's probably bad
form, but that's my emotional reaction.
Xref: sparky houston.general:959 tx.general:655 tx.politics:4663