The NATO 3, Brent Betterly, Jared Chase, and Brian Jacob Church, are three political prisoners still at Cook County Jail awaiting trial. They have been imprisoned since the 2012 NATO Summit protests took place in Chicago.

In the past two weeks, the NATO 3 and their defense team have argued several motions in limine for the upcoming trial January 13th. These motions set the boundaries of what can be discussed by either side in front of a jury. Attorneys for the 3 used this opportunity to confront the blatant political repression and police violence at the heart of the case by pushing for strict limits on the prosecution’s ability to criminalize the defendants through inflammatory rhetoric and misinformation regarding their alleged Anarchist political beliefs.

On December 2nd, the defense argued that the over-use of the word terrorism and the labeling of the NATO 3 as supposed terrorists would strongly influence the jury to view these political prisoners as dangerous criminals without any clear factual basis. The prosecutors have already repeatedly used the term to automatically and prejudicially criminalize the defendants both in court filings and in the press.

Additionally, this trial date featured a lengthy argument over the state’s continued reference to the defendant’s Anarchist politics and their alleged participation in the so-called, “Black Bloc Group.” Defense attorney Michael Deutsche implored judge Thaddeus Wilson to prevent the prosecution from putting the politics of the defendants on trial, to distract from the inadequacy of their case and the gross police brutality and surveillance that took place during the NATO Summit protests. The defense cited the multitude of Anarchist perspectives, calling into question the very idea that there is one essentialist definition of, “Anarchism,” that could be attached to the defendant’s beliefs or that this definition of Anarchism implied the use of violence as a tactic. In regards to references to the Black Bloc, Deutsche rejected the very idea that Black Bloc is anything but the practice of wearing black in a public demonstration and couldn’t possibly demonstrate any particular organizational affiliation. Attorney Molly Armour compared the prosecution of the 3 to the Red Scares of the 1920s and 50s, forcing the defense to argue the legitimacy of their beliefs rather than the factual reality of a (non) existent plot.

Continue reading →