John's Pastor Speaks Out

September 1, 1999
Rev. R. E. Knodel, Jr.

Letters to the Editor / Robert Wimer
The News & Advance
P.O. Box 10129
Lynchburg, VA 24506

Dear Mr. Editor,

On account of The News & Advance's woeful neglect of its Fourth Estate responsibilities to investigate and report the news, instead of creating it, or simply repeating deceptive party lines, I would ask that you print the following. It is almost two years after the arrest of the Rev. Flip Benham and student John Reyes, and our community has been yet deprived of the following rudimentary aspects to the Benham/Reyes Case!

1) No arrests were made at the scene! Various contrived explanations, justifying the later arrests, have been published later; but the fact remains that the witnessing at the school was orderly and respectful. Officers who were trained to discern offenses saw none on the scene!

2) Lynchburg had peculiar laws, regarding the zoning of public sidewalks around and near the school, which were not so designated with warning signs! The Operation Rescue witnesses had no way of knowing that Lynchburg considered her sidewalks non-public, until they were so notified by Officer Stephen Clark, who was in charge at the scene. Citizens cannot be expected to obey peculiar yet unposted laws! How are they to even know about them? Operation Rescue had followed their Lynchburg procedure in over 2000 other locations across America without a single arrest!

3) Early in the demonstration, John Reyes was specifically told by Officer Clark to remain on the sidewalk where he was. Later he was commanded by unidentified school personnel to move. Following the officer's advice, he was later (three weeks!) arrested for not immediately removing himself, despite the contrary advice he had received!

4) John Reyes' civil rights have been violated by the arbitrary and selective prosecution of Lynchburg's peculiar and unposted laws. Law must be applied evenly. Yet here, Lynchburg showed her biased and vengeful intentions by arresting only a few of the hundreds of demonstrators at the scene, who Lynchburg insists were breaking her laws! Either they were all guilty and should have been arrested, or none were guilty and none should have been arrested. Purely on the basis of the arrests themselves, Lynchburg has shown a contempt for law - which is based on equity - opting instead for selective, punitive prosecution/incarceration! This is a transgression of the Federal Civil Rights law! In pressing for Reyes' guilt, Lynchburg herself is guilty!

5) The manner of John's arrest, and the sentence he received, also show a selective and punitive intent on the part of the court. (a) Never before in the history of Virginia has a grand jury been called to issue an arrest warrant for the charge of trespass! Trespassers are arrested at the time and occasion of the trespass, not weeks later, as a result of a grand jury! The bizarre use of the grand jury for this petty offence cries out for justification! (b) Likewise, in terms of trespassing sentences, this case exhibits prejudice. Normally, criminal intent must be shown for such sentences. Here, none was proved. Additionally, in cases where criminal intent has been obvious, sentences without the severity of John Reyes are normal. Felonious shoplifters are normally barred by law from the premises they have victimized. They are forewarned by court letter of the threat of punishment for their trespass. Yet almost never are they given any jail time whatsoever if and when they are arrested for subsequent trespass! In John's case he had no prior warning by posted sign, but was given six months jail time! (c) Normally, first time offenders are given suspended sentences. Yet in John's case he was given a sentence much more severe than many area felony penalties!

In terms of the local news media, and your own responsibility, the most galling aspect of all this is that they/ you have never even hinted at the above problems. They/ you have simply repeated the prosecution's argument, despite repeated exhortation from others like myself. They/ you have actively / energetically resisted even-handedness. When given a list of Judge Miller's typical sentences, which showed notable and vicious contrast with the Rev. Flip Benham's and John Reyes' sentences, you not only refused to investigate, or print what you had been given, you even refused our disseminating the judge's record by paid advertisement! You have left your sentinel post as the Fourth Estate, and have become - in this case - a shill for our local government.

In a dreadful repeat of history, as in the Civil Rights struggle of the 1950's and 1960's, you have allowed yourself to be part of the repressive establishment, instead of remaining a detached and helpful antidote to local prejudices. In the first case, the victims were the Afro-americans of Lynchburg. Today they are its evangelical Christians!

Rev. R. E. Knodel, Jr.