On Oct. 3, protesters packed the Lane County Circuit Court to support one man charged with disorderly conduct in the second degree.
The defendant, Samuel Joseph Yergler, was one of 52 arrested after his involvement in the April 15 I-5 pro-Palestine protest and blockade. All except 19 of the 52 protesters arrested were given a diversion option, which offers community service and a $100 citation.
The remaining 19 defendants, all charged with disorderly conduct in the second degree, are set to go to trial from October to Jan. 2025.
“I hope the judge recognizes the legitimacy of the defenses that these actions of civil disobedience, that are happening worldwide, but specifically in the United States are absolutely necessary and are the last line of defense,” one protester who goes by the alias, Gloria, said.
The Daily Emerald granted Gloria the use of an alias for protection against “violent and reactionary people” in the community.
By “necessary,” as a defense, Gloria refers to ORS 161.200 or the “choice of evils” law. It states that “physical force” or “conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal” when a person or the public faces imminent injury.
Protesters blocked the I-5 in solidarity with the A15 – April 15 — movement across the world, where supporters were encouraged to “blockade major choke points in the economy.”
According to one protestor and former Insurgent writer also facing charges, Eric Howanietz, their actions on April 15 were a “necessity.”
“We’ve cataloged about 15 other direct actions we did,” Howanietz said. “We really feel like we had exhausted all other options and were left with this case where we could key into this global action that was occurring.”
Court documents state that Yergler argued his actions on April 15 constitute “advocacy, campaigning, educational outreach, petitioning of government officials and other lobbying efforts, boycotts and personal actions to avert the harms of U.S. complicity in Israel’s war and genocide.”
In order to advance a choice-of-evils defense, Yergler will have to present evidence proving three things. First, that actions in April were necessary to avoid threatened injury, the injury was imminent, and that it was “reasonable for him to believe the need to avoid the injury was greater than the statute they were found to have violated, seeks to prevent.”
On Oct. 3, the court heard opening statements from both the defense and prosecution, witnesses testimony and some evidence was presented.
The jury was dismissed and were instructed to return on Oct. 4.