Bobby Cann Updates: Ryne San Hamel Pleads Guilty, Receives 10 Days in Jail

Jason Jenkins at ActiveTrans is helping to coordinate community response.  If there is any chance you can attend proceedings, please reach out to him: 

jason@activetrans.org.

 

Views: 44157

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rich Evans on June 20, 2015 at 12:50pm

I've been following it, and very much appreciate your updates.  Just doing it quietly, I'm afraid.   

Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on June 22, 2015 at 6:15am

I hate this thread. I hate the persistent brand of slacktivism displayed by individuals who have never shown up for a Court date, yet admonish courtroom advocates for not reporting in detail the substance and content of each status court date, which for the most part, lack substance or content. I hate the presumptuousness of individuals who suggest that because this thread is not sufficiently active for their tastes, that the only possible explanation is that members of the cycling community don't care or have forgotten. And I hate those individuals who believe that their "need to know" is more important than the feelings and wishes of Bobby Cann's family (as communicated in this thread) that this thread was upsetting or unsettling to them.

Permalink Reply by Andrew on June 22, 2015 at 7:10am

I love everything Kevin said.  Thank you, sir.

Permalink Reply by Alex Z on June 22, 2015 at 9:47am

Agreed, Kevin C.

Permalink Reply by SixtyTwoPercent on June 23, 2015 at 12:29am

Maybe your feelings would be tempered were you to consider that maybe people are concerned that the lack of discourse might allow this individual to get away with this heinous crime. Sufficient time has elapsed and with no public interest (yes, you read that right), what is the judge left to work with? Arguments made by the defense? Do you think the prosecutors will have the same conviction now several years after the incident?

With all due respect, the family needs to understand that this is bigger than their feelings. They can certainly choose to not read these blogs. 

I would rather get the word out over and over again so that all - jurors, judge, counsel - understand that behavior like this untenable. 

And you too can ignore these threads.

My head hurts even trying to understand how people think being quiet is effective in this case. Speak up. Let your voice be heard. Start hanging banners all over town with the case info and a reminder to all that we are not letting this fade away.

Permalink Reply by Alex Z on June 23, 2015 at 1:02am

You are welcome to come to court and post about it. No one will stop you.

Permalink Reply by Eli on June 23, 2015 at 3:30am

For many of us, the need to keep a roof over our heads and food on the table stops us from attending these. I resent the implication that only those cyclists sufficiently privileged to take a day off work for every court date deserve to know what's going on in a case which is of concern to everyone. This is a public proceeding of a public body. It is not the private property of any one group.

Permalink Reply by Joe Schmoe on June 23, 2015 at 6:02am

"Privileged"? Ok, you've crossed from self-absorbed and pedantic to truly nutty. The advocates don't owe you anything. You're not going to get your way by bitching in an internet forum, particularly using the accusatory tone and sense of entitlement. 

The victims family asked that details not be shared.   This isn't about you. Why would you even think to make it about you? 

Permalink Reply by Eli on June 23, 2015 at 7:12am

Nowhere have I suggested that the courtroom advocates owe me anything. I am responding to the attacks in this thread on those of us who are unable to show up at the hearings as much as we would like to do so. This is not an option that is equally available to everyone.

There is value in certain points being made public. For example, it is through this thread that I learned that Alvarez didn't bother to even send anyone for one court date. As her constituent I'm glad I found out how unseriously she takes this case so that I can cast an informed vote.

Permalink Reply by Skip Montanaro 0mi on June 23, 2015 at 7:16am

> For example, it is through this thread that I learned that Alvarez didn't bother to even send anyone for one court date.

There was a representative from the State's Attorney's office, but was not prepared to argue the motions.

Permalink Reply by Eli on June 23, 2015 at 7:17am

Ah, thank you for the clarification.

Permalink Reply by Alex Z on June 23, 2015 at 6:13am

I think there may be some confusion.

 

All that is happening here is: some people have signed up to participate as official courtroom advocates. This program is, I believe, run by the Chicago Police Department, and ATA is coordinating this particular effort. In this case, the victim's family has asked the courtroom advocates not to post about the hearings in forums like the Chainlink. Thus far, people who have attended as part of the courtroom advocates' program have (mostly?) complied.

 

Literally anyone else is free to attend any hearing and report on what happened. Anyone on this forum could coordinate a separate group that would send one person to each hearing on a rotating basis and report back to the forum. Thus far, no one has done so.

 

Those who are frustrated by the lack of updates on the Chainlink have several options:

 

1) Complain that ATA and the courtroom advocates are not reporting about the hearings on the Chainlink. (Thus far, this tactic has not yielded results.)

 

2) Advocate that media outlets increase their coverage of the hearings. (This tactic seems to have successfully resulted in the Reader publishing a follow-up story.)

 

3) Go to a hearing yourself and report on the proceedings. (As far as I know, no one has done this.)

 

4) Organize a rotating group of people to attend the hearings and report to the Chainlink. (I am fairly certain no one has done this.)

 

What is somewhat obnoxious is the insinuation that the case has been forgotten simply because the courtroom advocates have not been publicly posting about the hearings. The courtroom advocates receive regular updates from ATA, and at the last hearing I attended there were about a dozen people present in support of Bobby. I suspect that 12 people standing in court in support of Bobby send a stronger message to the court than do 12 pages of argument on the Chainlink.

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service