The+Paideia+Weekly

= =

=**ERIC THOMAS VS. JANE AND TILLY'S CLASS GOVERNMENT**= By Priyanka Farrell


 * ERIC'S PRE-TRIAL (March 29th)**

As many of you know we had a very intense trial on Wednesday. “The question is whether or not Eric was wrongly convicted” Two days before the case, the prosecution held a pre-trial meeting as did the defense.

The prosecution is headed up by Nathan Young and Benjamin dollar, and also includes Ben Klein, Katharine Walls, Isabel Goronzy, Michael Yamashita, and Isabel Goddard. The group was very enthusiastic and had high hopes of winning the case. But an obvious grey area the group faced was the fact that Eric Thomas of the Santeria church of North Georgia was the only one convicted since ESAR (endangered species act revision) was passed. The group hoped to smooth this over by saying that “ they were not targeting this religion, they just had no prior knowledge” The group continued to discuss the matter and eventually brought in the Smith vs. Employment Division case: In this case 2 Indian men were fired for smoking peyote. The Indians brought this case to the court and in defense saying it was a large part of their religion. (First amendment) It was decided after a long debate, that the Indian should not smoke peyote, and the government won. The prosecution hoped to use this as an example of an earlier case of religion vs. government, and continues to look to the 1st amendment for help. “ Just because they are that religion (Santeria) doesn’t give them the right to abuse the wildlife,” states Isabel Goddard. The group continues to discuss their plan for the trial, and decides that their main plan is that they are trying to show the judges that they are not against the religion, but they are against the killing of endangered animals. What is the point of ESAR if it can be broken? “Our job is to make sure the endangered animals are protected!” expressed Katharine Walls. We now lie and wait for the trial…
 * Prosecution:**

Jonathan Garrett and Katie Klingenberg, as well as Anna Figueroa, Elizabeth O’roark, Anna Morris, Nazz Haygood, and Nate Mason are responsible for defending Eric. The defense believes that the Government is targeting Eric’s religion or “suppressing his religion” because, as established earlier by the Prosecution, Eric was the only one convicted. A large part of the group seem to believe if the church was Catholic that Eric would no longer be charged for killing the animals. Although he didn’t kill the animals by sacrifice he disturbed them by building and construction when he was making a new church. “He’s being charged for disturbing the habitat not sacrificing!” So why should the Santeria be charged, when others could have possibly done the same. Later Nazz Haygood brings up the argument that Eric had the property, which means he owns everything on it, so shouldn’t the animals belong to him? This influenced the party’s main argument and final case: Eric Thomas has a certificate of occupancy. He has a hunting license. He also has a building permit. As we wait, I noticed that a common theme on both sides is trying to defeat the others sides argument. This is one intense case and I can’t wait to see where it will go.
 * Defense:**


 * THE TRIAL (April 1st)**

The government chose Nathan Young to open their case, he started by saying that Eric Thomas did not get scientific review (which is where scientists review your area to see if you are endangering the animals) and you need scientific review because if you don’t it’s against the law. He referred to Smith vs. Employment Division, saying that the government then did not give the Indians the right to use peyote even though it was part of their religion. Following Nathan, from the Defenders side is Katie Klingenberg. She states that he had a building permit, “a building permit is a county issued permission slip” that allows them to build on the land. Eric also has a certificate of occupancy. Along with these 2 factors, he has a right to property, and as long as he follows what is mandated in the law, he has a right to have a church there because of the free exercise clause in the first amendment of the constitution.
 * Prosecution:**
 * Defense:**

Later Katharine Walls argues against this statement saying the building permit is a county law, where as ESAR is a federal law. What is more important? Walls lets the question hang for answers from the defense. Nate Mason then asks “But why is Eric the only one who was convicted?” Isabel Goddard answers this by saying "Others weren’t convicted because they did not kill the endangered animals.” Nathan says that they only convicted Eric because they had more proof. Nathan goes on to describe the proof (killing bats with pesticides, cutting down trees, etc.) Anna Figueroa argues that Eric did not mean to harm animals. Katharine says that Eric could have had another forest, where he could kill animals that weren’t endangered, but he cannot kill endangered animals on his property! This is against the federal law! This land was protected by ESAR, because the animals needed the space to recover. Jonathan says that “ Eric built outside of the national forest, he did build in forest that was protected, but he did not build in the national forest.”

Ben Dollar delivers the closing statement saying that “We did not have anything against his religion...(and goes on to describe the religion). He finishes by saying that the only reason why Eric was the only one convicted was because there wasn’t enough evidence for anyone else to be convicted. The fact is Eric didn’t get scientific review. Katharine Wall finishes with “The fact that the forest isn’t in the national forest is irrelevant, what matters is that the Endangers Species Act Revised protects the animals and their habitat, which you just destroyed!”

The case has yet to be decided.

= = =TRIAL COURT day 1= article by Anna Figueroa On Wednesday, February 18, Jane and Tilly's class supreme court had their first case. Eric Thomas has violated an endangered species act revision by building on an endangered species habitat. Nate Mason, Katie Klingenberg, and Jonathan Garret are Eric Thomas's defendants. They stated that it was unjust that Thomas was the only one convicted when other people had built on the land also. Jonathan stated other things that were over ruled by prosecuter Ben Dollar. Ben Dollar and Nathan Young are the prosecutors in this case. They state that Thomas was the leader in this church that sacrificed endangered species while also building on the habitat. They argue that this is directly violating the endangered species act. The judges had an open meeting and decided that there wasn't enough information and needed to have a trial. Thomas was very relieved. = = =Trail Court!!= article by Anna Figueroa Starting Monday, January 9th 2009, Jane and Tilly's class supreme court is taking cases. The convicted that come to this court will probably have broken a recent law that was added during Cheese Day. These kind of law breakers are more common now since U.S citizens aren't used to these new enforcements. The first case JaTi has taken on is with a man named Eric Thomas. Thomas built on land near a protected forest and disturbed many animals including a type of endangered turkey and brown thrashers. Also, Thomas belongs to the Santeria Church. The Santeria Church believes that to be able to connect with the Gods, you have to sacrifice an animal(s). Jonathan, Katie, and other defendants agreed that Eris Thomas has that right to practice his own religion. Now prosecutors ask, "What about the endangered animals?" Evidence has also shown that other people had built in the area, but Thomas and his church were the only ones convicted. On Wednesday the 11th, we shall find out more information about the Thomas case from defendants Jonathan and Katie and also from the prosecutors, Ben Dollar and Nathan Young.

= = = = =Cheese Day is a success!= article by Anna Figueroa After two days of citizens brain storming ideas for bills to congress, today Wednesday the 14th, congress people will start to work with the citizens. Congressman Nazz Hagood is excited about this project. With 3 proposals in his hands, he has lots of work to do. "I have many different varieties of problems to work with." he explains, "I'm working wiyh Tomris Ahmed-Shah with human trafficing, Benjamin Klien on the economy, Micheal Yamashita with illegal dog breeding and Graham Owen on dunk driving." Mr. Hagood smiles. "Yeah, I have a lot to do!" I walk over to the calmer part of the room where people are writing the start to their bills which they will present on Wednes the 21st. Here, the citizens and the congress are more organized, with their thoughts scribbled on a peice of paper. This might seem simple, but there are lots of details to consider. "I've witnessed a horrible car crash caused by a drunk driver. When I think of those innocents killed and their devestated family members." Citizen Graham Owen says, explaining his inspiration for his bill. Helping Mr. Owen are congres people Nazz Hagood and Elizabeth O'Roark. "We've decided to add more lamp posts on accident-prone roads." Ms. O'Roark tells me. "If a post goes out, the state has 1 week to repair the damamge." Cabinet members are working very hard also. Interior secratary, Katherine Walls, is working on mulitple enviormental problems. Secratary of State, Isabel Goronzy, is working with Secratary Walls on international eviromental problems. Over all, the cheese was great and the proposals were even better!

**YAY! There's cheese in the White House!**
Article by Anna Figueroa On Thursday, President Tilly Hatcher announced a special event-Cheese Day. That's right, the president will bring crackers and different assortments of cheese on Monday the 12th of January! The plan of this holiday is to have everyday citizens come to D.C and present to congress a problem that you would like to be fixed. Having heard your problem, congress will come together and comprimise on a law that will help you. And yes, there will be cheese for everyone who chooses to attend this historic event. "This is a wonderful opertunity for the U.S. To have the people come and share their thoughts is amazing!" Says congress woman Izzy Goddard. So please, come and speak your mind, change your world and have some cheese on January 12th, 2009.


 * Cabinet Works Together for the State of the Union Address** Article by Anna Figueroa

On Monday, the cabinet members had a civil meeting on the state of the union address. They brainstormed for a long period of time. They discussed the environment, the financial situation and the image of the United States. Katherine Walls, Secretary of the Interior, is focusing on global warming and endangered species. Her goal in this address is to encourage the people of the U.S.A to switch to more conservative ways without sounding like it’s the end of the world. “We will not force the people to adjust to these incentives, but I hope that they do realize what is good for our planet and the common good. For we are a country of choice and the people’s way of everyday life should be in their best interests.” Meanwhile, Benjamin Klien, Secretary of Tresurary, is working on the approval of spending for the endangered species act and funding for government buildings to be more enviormently friendly. An example is adding florecant light bulbs. “If we get the government to make little changes, the people have an example to follow.” Explains Secretary Klein. Concentrating really hard and scribbing on a piece of paper is the secretary of state, Isabel Goronzy. Her goal is to improve the image of the U.S and our take on the war on terror. “It will be difficult, but that’s why we’re all here.” With everything that’s been going on lately, it’s encouraging that our cabinet is so determined.

Article by Michael Yamashita

Reporter Michael Yamashita, comes in to hear the cabinet members discussing the economy and the environment. "Maybe we should limit how much water people can use each day?" suggests Priyanka. "No that wouldn't work." says Nazz,"We could give tax cuts to people who use less water?" says Nazz. "How about we filter water people are using then send the water back to be used again?" says Izzy. "That might work!" says Anna. They start to discuss how they can connect the pipes from your shower and the pipes from your toilet then you would reuse the water from your shower. "I think that is a great idea! If people can't afford that we will just lower their taxes if they use less water." "That might work!" says Anna finishing the conversation.