“Does a delegate have the right to physically lay hands on another delegate and remove them from the convention because they don’t agree with the sign he was holding?”, questions Tom Lang in a phone interview.
When Lang called officials of the democratic committee they first responded by telling Lang that it was a security guard that removed Toleos for his sign. When Lang told them that he had both photos and video footage of the entire incident, as well as of the person in question wearing a delegate badge, the conversation ubruptly ended. One would ask, who is this mysterious delegate that has the power to police other delegates in this manner?
Toleos was originally told that the reason he was removed was that his sign was hand written, yet when he asked if he could correct this with a printed sign he was still told the sign was out of question. Toleos was also denied a clarification while within feet of the rules table. Are dissenting voices being silenced in an above the law fashion?
The civil rights department of the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office has taken information regarding this incident, and is in discussion over civil rights violations.
I am a pretty vocal civil rights activist. It amazes me that John Kerry has been able to keep his anti-gay marriage policies under the radar for so long, even in the state where gay marriage began, even from activists like me. I have to thank Aaron Toleos for bringing this to our attention. To make sure there is no confusion let me clarify; Aaron Toleos is not someone that snuck into the convention, he is an invited delegate who was holding a sign as other delegates were.
I’m no legal eagle like some of you out there, and I consider myself also a novice in the realm of politics. I welcome all opinions, including Earnie Boch III and Peter Porcupine to come in and bring their own light to this situation.
The sign read “Kerry against equality…Equal marriage!” or something to the effect. It was nothing profane or rude, just angrily denouncing one of Kerry’s stands, and mentioning him by name.
<
p>I did think that while the delegate was being taken out how skillfully the other man was handling it. The other man had his hands closed over the delegate’s fists, arms over his and pushing him bodily from behind. The delegate was resisting (not going slack, though) while the other was propelling him toward the exit. I did not remark whether the person ejecting him was wearing a security uniform or not. I further do not know at what point/for what reason the man was ejected.
So now we know what the Democratic Party in Mass is all about:
Clean Ejections! Is this the best we can do – improve our skills at removing dissenters from the convention? Pathetic.
you may be called in to testify..
considered a civic duty if one witnesses something like that. People shouldn’t be afraid to testify.
We’ve had cases before where members witnessed possible crimes, and their postings here were used to discredit them in court. Sabutai should absolutely not be afraid to testify, but he should be very careful what he says here.
of course, I’m not trying to suggest Sab be afraid. I’m just saying that he could be called in to testify and he should be careful about what he says publicly about it. I think that’s sound advice =)
Sab didn’t really offer much other than what he, as an impartial and not invested witness, observed. Of course, I get that he should use caution and might actually benefit from writing down (for his own rememberence) what he saw while it’s fresh in his mind. I don’t think I ever read about Ed Prisby’s involvement in the other witness event. Sound advice, yes.
I’m not gonna run off on the mouth at this, but I would be happy to repeat any and all this under oath. I can’t imagine how such a cause célèbre would help anybody connected with the case, but justice is its own end.
From my vantage point, I thought that the sign said:
<
p>”John Kerry: Anti-Gay Marriage, Anti-Massachusetts”. And he was certainly ejected in a rough manner.
It is amazing to me how many people are backing up Aaron how this took place. How far away were you when you saw this happen?
I was meaning to ask you what had happened!
<
p>Let’s get the video and photos of this up, because it’s a serious charge and we should have the evidence at hand (so we can do something about it).
and Aaron Toleos will be releasing this video evidence soon, but they have to consult with their lawers first. This is big…. really big. I’ve never covered something of this magnitude before. I am carefully watching everything I am saying right now on this issue. I suppose that should be second nature for an activist, but I haven’t felt so aware of the need until now.
<
p>I expect Aaron to come through with his promise in short time.
The answer was in the link to the article in the Globe all along. The sign said:
<
p>”John Kerry, Anti-Gay Marriage, Anti-Massachusetts.”
and if it bears up what you’ve told us, count me among those who will be demanding answers from the DSC. There’s no room for civil rights and first amendment challenges in the Democratic Party. I’m still struggling with the fact that the party had an issue with a hand-written sign! I can’t count the number of hand written signs I’ve seen over the years. Seems like we’re becoming…..Republicans.
When we start silencing the opinions of those with whom we disagree we in effect become what we stand against.
It’s very possible that handmade or nonstandard signs are forbidden as I have been to events where that is the case. There were of course plenty of campaign signs for both candidates. It certainly does not excuse physical assault by a fellow delegate, however.
Remember also that Aaron asked if he could have the sign printed with the same message and was told no. Also while on his way out he asked for a clarification of the rule he was being told and was denied, even being feet from the rulings table.
<
p>I feel that when the identity of this man is revealed the story will be much larger.
if there was security present dressed to look like delegates. or maybe the guy was an actual delegate who is a really phobic cop in real life, and just couldn’t control his autocratic penchant.
There are STRICT rules as to who can where a delegate pin. No security guard would have had the clearance to do such a thing.
<
p>Why would the democratic committee official have ended the call so abruptly when Tom Lang mentioned he had a photograph that clearly indicated both the delegate pin and the identity of this man in question?
<
p>If the facts are as my good friends whom I trust say they are this is all very troubling.
If you’re talking about those orange “D” pins, we were giving those away indescriminently.
<
p>Not that this excuses the shitty treatment, but it’s possible that a non-delegate would be wearing one of those pins.
that this man was another delegate, and knowing Aaron is to trust him. All the facts in this case are about to be made public when they get clearance to show the video.
<
p>That being said the alternative is that there was a security guard who acted either on his own or by orders and still violated Aaron’s rights.
<
p>Yup, shitty treatment indeed.
Rules? Well, we do know there’s very clear rules about how long candidates (and their introducers) are allowed to speak. That one wasn’t enforced, even after John Kerry and his people went twice, and then three times, longer than his 12 minutes!
I’m not defending the behavior of either party but there is a rule:
<
p>From http://www.massdems.org/dsc/27…
<
p>
And from the same source…
for kissing. none of the nearby heterosexuals were asked to leave. double standards are so ugly, aren’t they?
some of them were kissing too. they got featured on the jumbotron.
it may or not be appropriate, but it isn’t a double standard.
<
p>The no-sign rule is wholly unrelated to the 15 minute speaking rule. The no jaywalking rule is wholly unrelated to the no shoplifting rule.
<
p>The no adult kissing is entirely related to adult kissing. That’s why the Safeco shenanigans were a double standard but the anti-JFK-sign vs. the JFK-talks-too-long complaint don’t represent a double standard. It merely reflects an inconsistent enforcement of different, unrelated rules.
i don’t think so. i was responding to the “you must follow the rules but i don’t have to” aspect to the comment i replied to, not speaking thing per se.
<
p>to me, if security asked aaron to remove his sign but didn’t ask other owners of hand-made signs to do the same (something implied in the comments here), the analogy with the kissing lesbians is valid.
… but not actually stated. I would like to know whether it is in fact the case that others with hand-made signs were allowed to keep them. I haven’t heard that; to the contrary, the only comment actually on point (relating an incident last year) suggests that the party is fairly strict about homemade signs regardless of their content.
from aaron’s post. but i’m with you – i’d like to know, from a less biased source, whether others were allowed to keep signs.
What constitutes a homemade sign? Hand lettering? Or would a computer printed sign from a custom sign shop count? I think the objection is to un-approved messages, not hand lettering. I heard that at an Obama event, no outside signs were allowed, and people were given hand-lettered signs to hold that volunteers had created, with the campaign’s own messages. There is something special about a hand-written sign, it not only makes you want to read them, it gives the message extra credibility with some personal investment.
The party had their staff and security pick them up. My experience is that John Walsh and Stacy Monahan have been evenhanded about enforcement of materials in the hall. Having known Stacy for years, I made all agruments and then appealed to our friendship to allow the flyers and was shot down.
<
p>Since every Delegate is mailed the rules, demanding to be shown the rule really has no merit. Like saying I can’t be arrested for bank robbery because I have not been shown the law against it.
<
p>When you sign the registration and accept you credential you are agreeing to abid by the rules. You still have your free speech rights but with the context of the rules and procedures.
<
p>As for the possibility of assault – both sides will have their witnesses. Sounds as if Arron condcuted himself with dignity and has a legit complaint about his removal vs removal of the sign.
<
p>Is anyone really surprised at the tactics utilised here.
<
p>If you don’t like the message (e.g. one that doesn’t jive with Deval Patrick and John Kerry’s fansiful storyline) you are physically ejected with no possibility of appeal to party rules officials, even if your a delegate.
<
p>I had a reason not to be at the convention, but I was in no hurry to attend. I know contests can get “heated,” but having the power of officialdom on one’s side (e.g. John Kerry) is a tremendous advantage.
<
p>Whether it was security or another delegate is frankly irrelevant. The question is was this ejection sanctioned by certain party officials?
<
p>Notice that I don’t say the actual party because the delegate apparently was never able to make his case to the rules committee. This “proposed action” became an accomplished fact where the delegate had no possibility of appeal.
<
p>Was this action indicative of John Kerry’s determination to silence dissent?
<
p>Who was behind this?
<
p>
Lies in the abrupt reaction the committe had to hearing there was a video of the event. Something seems amiss, that’s for sure.
Rather, I’d take it as whoever Aaron was speaking to finally getting a clue that s/he had better be careful what was being said to a potential plaintiff. But of course I wasn’t there…
Yeah that’s a reach
John, I’m no lawyer either, but I would remove this entire diary if I were you. This sounds like an ongoing investigation where you yourself weren’t even present, so you might not be doing any favors to the alleged victim.
<
p>Last year, if I remember correctly, another poster made some comments on here about a car accident he had seen and those comments were later used against him as showing bias against the accused.
or near arrest for a state senator?
inquiring minds want to know!
smallddemocrat- welcome to BMG. Perhaps you need to revisit what the ratings mean, because it seems as your only contribution to date has been to go through this thread and pepper people with 3’s or 6’s.
<
p>I’m not sure what is “worthless” about my suggesting that John be careful with this diary or sabutai noting what s/he saw.
I am very aware I should be careful here, but this story needs to be talked about. That’s why I brought it here; I knew those who blog here will make sure this gets the proper attention. Prior to posting the only words in print about this seems to be that brief blurb from the Globe on Sunday.
<
p>If nothing else we should make sure people know where Kerry stands on marriage equality. Being anti-gay marriage in the only state that allows this equality makes me wonder what he is thinking, and it definitely makes me think twice before voting for him. He’s no Kennedy…
whether Mr. Toleos voted with his delegation. They told me that he did. Assuming that’s accurate, either the vote occurred before this incident (which seems unlikely), or Mr. Toleos re-entered the hall (presumably without his sign), took his place with his delegation, and voted.
<
p>From that, it appears that Mr. Toleos was not excluded from the convention, though I’m certainly happy for additional details to be added.
Looking forward to the response to that question.
I see you tied the knot.
August 12 will make 14 years together and one year married.
vynal
spelling please
Vynal square. When I sold real estate in Greater Lowell, you wouldn’t believe how many property listing sheets bragged about the vynal siding on the house.
Are you perhaps referring to Vinal Square? When you sold real estate, did you notice that North Chelmsford has a different Zip code and water district from Chelmsford?
<
p>What has this got to do with the topic, anyway?
I’m not a big John Kerry fan (last time he ran for Senate, I wrote in someone else), and I do support marriage equality. However, I think it reasonable if a political party wants to keep the tone positive at its convention, and ask people to stick to signs that support candidates and issues instead of attacking other Democrats.
<
p>If signs slamming other potential Democratic nominees were allowed, but an anti-Kerry sign was not allowed, that would not seem fair or reasonable.
http://vps28478.inmotionhosting.com/~bluema24/showD…
Of course I am kidding. They are as intolerant and as inflexible as many of the posters on BMG.
<
p>What hurts your case John is your penchant for believing that intolerance towards gays is behind every incident involving a gay. Last summer you railed about the crime of the century involving Barry Scott. Now you seem to be intimating that the ejection of the sign holder is tantamount to a hate crime.
i read this diary as john being concerned that a delegate may have been assaulted by another delegate. the content of the sign was significant only in that is was a criticism of kerry.
<
p>what hurst your case RegularJoe is that you immediately shot the messenger, and had nothing of substance to say about the message.
Aaron is not gay.