Statement from some members of the Asheville 11: Naomi Ullian cooperated with law enforcement
From Anarchist News:
This is a public statement from some members of the “Asheville 11”. It is not written or intended to speak for a unanimous group as such a thing is figment at best.
Naomi Ullian is one of the people arrested on the night of May 1st 2010. Herself and the other 10 arrested make up the aforementioned “Asheville 11”. It is important to understand that there is no coherent organizing or strategy coming from all 11 people. The agreements amongst friends and comrades has been done based on affinity and want and not on the assumption that being arrested on the same night creates either of those things.
On December 6th, 2010, 6 months after our arrest and release Naomi Ullian decided to have a meeting with the District Attorney, Assistant District Attorney in charge of prosecuting our case and the lead Detective in the case. Her lawyer was present. What appeared in our discovery (evidence the prosecution has to disclose before trial) was a recounting of that meeting. It is not ‘testimony’, as in Naomi was not sworn in. And it is not a transcript, but a report form the prosecutors office. We were also given the handwritten notes of Detective Rollins.
We are disclosing this information now that the majority of the 11′s cases have been closed. Naomi has been involved in radical organizing for many years. She had been considered by many a trusted member of the anarchist and radical communities throughout North Carolina. She has had more then enough experience to understand that communication with the police or prosecution is snitching. And that she would be seen by many as a snitch. Which is the stance the authors of this piece take.
In this statement we would like to carefully divulge some of the transgressions that were made in the conversation she took part in. But please note, that these are not reasons why this conversation was reprehensible. The moment she sat at the table across from the enemy was the moment she lost our trust forever. These are simply examples for those outside of this dialogue to understand the gravity of the situation.
In the report, Naomi states that she was in Asheville during the May Day event and that she participated in some aspects. She firmly maintains her innocence concerning the vandalism and depicts an alternate sequence of events for herself and one other arrestee. In this description of events she clearly describes her perceived movements of the “riot”- what streets they came down, where they turned, at what point damage started, etc. She also gives a very limited description of the person she said “led” her from one event to another. In being questioned by the prosecution and Detective she gives descriptions about what kind of clothing possible participants were wearing. She does not describe any participant in personal detail.
The investigation into the 11 people arrested that night, has as most expected it would, transcended those boundaries and became an investigation into other individuals and groups. We are not privy to the types of investigation methods used, or how ferocious the tactics used to gain information are. In her conversation Naomi not only made connections between other arrestees and political organizing groups but opened the investigation to new targets. She clearly associates both those arrested and not arrested with several groups such as Earth First! A Wildland FirstAid Training and Mountain Justice Summer Organizing. Included in the additional discovery was prelimanry research into Mountain Justice organizing. We will never know how far that “research” has gone or will go in the future
Besides organizations, Naomi was asked about several individuals. She answered the questioning with personal information about them such as where they were from, where they lived now and their connections to the aforementioned groups and to one another. This has obviously had definite impacts on the lives of those she snitched on.
Naomi has acted in her own self-interest and forgone the ideas of solidarity that others can clearly live by. We do not talk to the police, ever. To do so would mean to make a clear break with those we once called comrade. Naomi has decided that her decisions are forgivable and that she should be allowed to walk amongst us. We disagree. Those who choose to associate themselves with her have that “right”, but must understand what the association of a snitch will bring you.
Naomi has made it clear that her own future, her own freedom and reputation are more important than us; and more important than a basic concept of solidarity. We say let that choice stand and make it known that she is now on her own.