troops=police

[ScS]

scs- thanks for taking steps to wake people up.

no problem tim. it's shit like this that pisses me off. one thing i find a bit interesting and coincedental about this whole thing is that bush was scheduled to be in salt lake city the following day. was this asskissing the president or were they truthfully concerned about these events being in their community?

it's scary to hear the police chief talk about future events like this. i forget the exact quote but he basically said that if they find out events like this are coming to his town, he will stop it before it starts. nothing like guilt before innocence, especially in the 'land of the "free"'.

keep in mind that a lot of the stories going out on the net from attendees and from the police consist of a lot of disinformation to make each side look in the right.

now a question, if a rave is so bad because of drug use, why isn't a rolling stones concert, or an nfl game not on their radar? could it be that a rave is commercially independent and corporations don't get any cut or is it that they are only concerned when they need to get a "message" across?

i'm libertarian leaning and think the war on drugs is a travesty of civil rights. i don't condone the drug use but i'm not going to penalize someone for ingesting something into their body that probably has no effects on anyone else.

a quote to leave you with that i've seen circulating lately:
First They Came for the Jews
---
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Pastor Martin Niemöller

i suggest you try and get your newspapers to cover this. there is no possible explanation why police would be dressed up in camo fatigues to bust a rave party. this was a militaristic intervention, not a standard law enforcement operation. is anyone familiar with posse comitatus?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

link:
http://kutv.com/topstories/local_story_235151602.html

[Guest]

http://www.music-versus-guns.org/

video with sound and lots of eyewitness reports

[ScS]

twas me. sorry to burden you with 2 posts.

[ScS]

http://harktheherald.com/modules.php?op ... &sid=63032

Friday, August 26, 2005 - 12:00 AM

In our view: The problem with assumptions

The Daily Herald

No citizen should be subjected to criminal charges for a crime he might commit. This is a fundamental principle in our society: One does not take blame for what might happen, only for violations of the law that he actually commits.

Utah County Sheriff Jim Tracy seems to see things differently.

<heraldextra.com/modules.php
In an interview with the Daily Herald on Wednesday, he indicated that he believes law enforcement has the authority to assume a violation will be committed, and officers may therefore go straight to writing a citation.

That is what happened Saturday night at an outdoor music concert and dance in Diamond Fork.

The event -- a rave -- was held on private property owned by Trudy Childs. An estimated 300 young adults attended the gathering, which was shut down at 11:30 p.m. by about 90 law enforcement officers in a massive show of force that included helicopters, dogs and assault rifles.

Some plainclothes officers with cell phones had mingled in the crowd and observed illegal drug activity, which has occurred at similar events. That -- combined with law enforcement's allegation that the gathering itself was illegal because proper county permits had not been obtained -- is what triggered the raid. SWAT teams stormed the crowd to make arrests, and many attendees, including the landowner, are now crying foul.

All the facts are not yet in with regard to criminal activity in the crowd. We expect to know more in the coming days. But we do have ample information to evaluate Tracy's claim that Childs had not obtained a necessary permit for the event.

The fact is, Childs did not need a permit.

Tracy protests that she did need one, but we believe he is wrong. Here's why:

A county ordinance specifies exactly the circumstances under which a mass gathering permit must be obtained from the Utah County Commission, and when a permit is not required. No person may host a gathering "of an actual or reasonably anticipated assembly of 250 or more people which continues or can reasonably be expected to continue for 12 or more consecutive hours" unless the host has a license, the ordinance reads.

The electronic beats at the rave began thumping at 9 p.m. Saturday. We cannot know exactly how long the party would have gone if police hadn't hammered down. But we do know a few things. We know, for example, that the promoter's agreement with the sound technicians was to end the show at 6:30 a.m. Sunday, as dawn approached. Privately contracted security personnel confirmed that they, too, were scheduled for that time period.

So the concert was intended for nine-and-a-half hours, well inside the 12-hour limit. It was a business proposition, and that was the deal.

In painting a picture that the gathering violated county public assembly codes, Tracy misrepresents not only the facts in Diamond Fork but distorts the proper role of law enforcement. We hope he understands his limitations as an officer of civil government.

Tracy said that authorities reasonably anticipated a crowd of thousands and expected partygoers to linger to 9 a.m. and beyond. "People are up all night partying hard and have a camping area," he said. "If you've been up since 9 o'clock the night before, we are assuming you're not going to jump right up and get out of there, and will exceed the 12-hour period."

Read that carefully again, with particular attention to "we are assuming." Tracy is saying that the 12-hour ordinance was violated because law enforcement, not the event host, anticipated the gathering would last more than 12 hours. This is an unjustified and even dangerous view.

It is not law enforcement's prerogative to enforce assumptions -- to hand out criminal or civil citations based on what might happen. Accusations must be made on the basis of actual observable acts, not on what a cop thinks will occur in the future.

Let's say a highway patrolman with a radar gun in a 60 mph zone clocks a driver at 59 mph. He cannot ticket that driver on the assumption that the car will soon be going much faster.

In short, the anticipation of a crowd of 250 for 12 hours as specified in the law must belong to the event host. If the host believes that a gathering will not exceed 12 hours, and he ensures that it does not (as was done in the case of the Diamond Fork rave), he is simply not required to obtain a permit.

No citizen of this country is required to impose more law upon himself than is specified by statute. And no county sheriff has a right to impose it, either.

This ordinance is written in the passive voice -- specifying an event "reasonably anticipated ... to continue" for 12 hours. It doesn't say who is to do the anticipating. Apparently Tracy believes it is he himself. But this is an implausible reading of the law. Such an interpretation would make the county sheriff the sole arbiter of which public gatherings require a permit and which do not. Tracy could prohibit anything he wanted, from a political rally to a knit-in or company picnic -- any gathering that is otherwise protected under the First Amendment's guarantee of the "right of the people peaceably to assemble."

Typically, in potentially embarrassing situations, law enforcement seems to reach for every thread of support it can find to justify its actions. It appears to us that Sheriff Tracy is reaching in just this way with arguments about permits for Saturday's rave. The organizers did get the required mass-gathering permits for on-site sanitation, and that's apparently all they really needed.

We understand that law enforcement is a difficult job. We also understand that some crimes were likely committed at the rave. But officers should not attempt to make their tough job easier by playing fast and loose with statutes, or by spinning the meaning of the law in hopes of achieving a favorable public relations effect.

/This story appeared in The Daily Herald on page A6./

[ScS]

http://www.slweekly.com/editorial/2005/ ... -09-01.cfm
---

Trudy Childs recalls rubbing her wrists and wincing in agony. No stranger to pain, the 52-year-old rheumatoid arthritis sufferer could barely tolerate the zip tags Utah County Sheriff’s deputies used to keep her in line. An unsympathetic officer congratulated Childs on an “Emmy-winning performance,” laughing as his colleagues—close to 90 law-enforcement officials, including Provo City police and a Utah Department of Corrections SWAT squad—cleared out hundreds of people attending Versus II, an electronic music event hosted on her private property Aug. 20. “I don’t know why you think this is so damn funny,” Childs told the officer, frustrated by his mocking grin.

Meanwhile, officers dressed in camouflage and helmets ushered revelers off Childs’ property. Armed with semiautomatic rifles, attack dogs and, allegedly, tear gas, few people questioned their authority. The next day, online forums and various blogs decried the “illegal rave” bust as a blatant violation of basic civil rights.

Authorities said that the all-night dance party attracted drug use, theft, sexual assault and underage drinking. They later said Versus II promoters didn’t have the proper permits to host a mass gathering of more than 250 people, “reasonably expected to exceed 12 hours.”

The permit in question now fuels pending legal action against Utah County. Brian M. Barnard, attorney for Childs and the concert promoters, High Point Productions and Uprok Records, said he’ll file a civil-rights suit in federal court. While Barnard has not yet filed a formal complaint, he’s confident the law is on his client’s side. Brandon Fullmer, manager of Uprok and part-promoter of Versus II, knew of the county ordinance but believed he didn’t need one since his party wouldn’t exceed 12 hours.

“I don’t think there’s any question that the sheriff misapplied the ordinance and acted improperly,” Barnard said, adding that the raid was discriminatory and an act of censorship. “If individuals break the law, punish them. But don’t assume that everyone who goes to a rap, hip-hop, or electronic music concert is a criminal.” The Sheriff’s Office did not return phone calls.

Utah County’s mass-gathering permit, and others like it, has roots dating back to perhaps the most famous mass gathering of all: Woodstock. Back then, officials nationwide wanted to prevent similar events in their own back yards. They feared a generation whose music and politics scoffed at authority.

“Fast forward to 2005 and things haven’t changed,” Barnard said. The irony becomes greater considering that the dancing-equals-eternal-damnation film, Footloose, was shot in Utah.

It’s not as if promoters wanted to rebel. In fact, they did all they could to comply with the law. Fullmer started planning the concert in April. He had thrown previous events as manager for a now-defunct record shop and didn’t foresee any trouble acquiring the necessary permits.

Fullmer, who scheduled the event for a 9.5-hour period, from 9 p.m. to 6:30 a.m., secured a permit through the Utah County Health Department (UCHD). He took out a $1 million insurance policy, hired security guards, rented portable toilets, obtained a solid-waste permit and met a number of other requirements before booking out-of-state and local DJs. Fullmer selected the Childs’ property as venue of choice for its sloping hills and scenic, redrock backdrop. He knew the family had a somewhat antagonistic relationship with Utah County law enforcement—Yancy and Rory Childs started throwing concerts in 2003, angering police with their rock and reggae noise—but figured since he’d met all the health permit’s requirements, there was no cause for concern. “I knew everything was good to go,” he said.

So did Trudy’s son, Rory Childs. The 23-year-old returned missionary, who planned to throw an Aug. 13 concert honoring a recently deceased friend, was determined to avoid a repeat of July 16, when local law-enforcement officials instigated a raid similar to the Aug. 20 bust, breaking up—but not arresting and/or ticketing—a large, heavy-metal audience. He researched all requirements, obtained a fire-safety permit, picked up a copy of the lengthy public-assemblies ordinance and says he showed it to UCHD officials who said it wasn’t necessary since his event would last less than 12 hours. Not taking any chances, Rory contacted Utah County Attorney Kay Bryson who gave him the runaround, with no straight answers and recommending he contact another attorney. Calls to Bryson’s office were not returned.

While the tribute concert went off without a hitch, its success gave Fullmer and High Point Productions a false sense of security. Like Rory, they did not “anticipate” their mass gathering to run beyond dawn.

“The sheriff, who apparently has a crystal ball allowing him to see into the future, said the concert would last more than 12 hours,” Barnard said. “But when the storm troopers came to visit, it was only two or three hours into the program.”

Some might suggest Fullmer should have secured the permit as a precaution so his bases would be covered. However, the ordinance is rife with arduous and costly requirements. For example, for large assemblies, promoters must hire a licensed physician for every 1,000 people on hand. An emergency medical staff is not enough. Besides, “The law doesn’t work with ‘should have known,’” Barnard said, adding that an individual cannot be held accountable for not predicting potential illegalities.

Childs understands her family can’t use their property however they please. She knows that the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld zoning restrictions and reasonable licensing of events such as the Aug. 20 ill-fated concert. She’s also learned, however, that sometimes bureaucratic measures complicate her constitutional rights. Twenty years ago, her family owned 9,500 acres of land. That number has since dwindled to 2,200.

In 1990, the Childs waged a five-year battle to protect a parcel of their land the Bureau of Reclamation wanted for constructing a pipeline. Or was it to save an endangered flower? The government’s story kept changing. Eventually, the Bureau won and her family waved goodbye to another chunk of property. She worries that her family will lose control of additional land—that is, if Utah County has anything to do about it.

Meanwhile, her sons Rory and Yancy still plan on turning part of their property into a music venue similar to Red Butte Gardens. Their venture might fill an overlooked niche in Utah County, offering a place for residents to enjoy a wide range of concerts—and, hopefully, never face the barrel of a gun.

[diesel]

the patriot act and the air of the current administration paved the way for the rave act though. funny how there was a case made on graffiti supporting biden for president when he was the sponsor of the rave act

hmm, are you referring to that self-righteous 'well informed' dude and his linguistics specialist turned unemployed model girlfriend?

[mango]

man, every day i read a little more about this story, and it makes me SO MAD.

thanks folks - for posting the articles, and esp. the wikipedia link.

[ScS]

if you've got the time and energy:

http://tribes.tribe.net/repealraveact

read more about it at the link posted.

[JEFFfromNC]

Thought I would try to keep this up to date...

Federal Lawsuit Filed In Rave Raid
Written by KUTV
Sunday, 04 September 2005
A Utah County ordinance used as justification for shutting down an all-night rave party in Spanish Fork Canyon is being challenged in a federal lawsuit.

Filed Friday in U.S. District Court here, the lawsuit asks for a judicial review of the ordinance and a determination that the organization seeking a mass-gathering permit should have the responsibility to determine the time-length of the gathering.

Two rave parties hosted by the Salt Lake record company UPROCK were shut down after less three hours each on July 16 and Aug. 20 by the Utah County sheriff's office. The closure was based on a ``prediction'' by Utah County Sheriff James Tracy that the concerts would last longer than the 12 hours allowed by permit, said attorney Brian Barnard, who filed the lawsuit on UPROCK's behalf.

The lawsuit seeks no monetary damage award but does ask for a court order that prevents the sheriff's office from shutting down an event based on ``guessing'' how long an event will last.

No hearing date has been set.

Utah County Attorney Kay Bryson said Friday he was aware of the lawsuit but could not comment on it.

The ordinance requires organizations seek a permit for gatherings where ``an actual or reasonably anticipated assembly of 250 or more people which continues or can reasonably be expected to continue for 12 or more consecutive hours.''

UPROCK obtained its permits from the Utah County Health Department and said the event would begin at 9 p.m. and end at 6:30 a.m. _ before the 12-hour deadline. Contracts between UPROCK and its equipment suppliers support that, Barnard said.

Officers shut the event down at 11:30 p.m.

``Clearly at one minute after 12 hours the statute's broken,'' Barnard said. ``The sheriff apparently has a crystal ball and can figure those things out.''

Roughly 90 police officers from multiple agencies broke up the event, arrested and issued citations to more than 60 people for violations ranging from weapons offenses to underage drinking, drug possession and driving under the influence, the sheriff's office has said.

One 17-year-old West Jordan girl overdosed on Ecstasy, and was treated and released to her parents.

Barnard said it's appropriate for officials to arrest those individuals breaking the law, but that the arrests don't justify shutting down the concert.

Utah County officials have also said that UPROCK needed an additional mass-gathering permit from the County Commission. The county ordinance mandates security-related permits for large events, officials have said.

UPROCK believed it had obtained all necessary permits and was not informed by the health department that any more were needed.

[JEFFfromNC]

And antoher one:


Promoter sues over canyon rave raid
Written by The Salt Lake Tribune
Sunday, 04 September 2005
The promoters of a rave held in Spanish Fork Canyon that was busted by Utah County sheriff's deputies filed a civil lawsuit Friday, claiming the sheriff misinterpreted the law and used unnecessary force to break up the party.

The suit, filed in U.S. District Court, seeks a review of Utah County's mass-gathering ordinance and a court order prohibiting the sheriff from terminating an event based upon his estimation of how long the event will operate.

Named in the suit are Sheriff James Tracy, Lt. Grant Ferre, County Attorney Kay Bryson, Commissioners Jerry Grover, Steve White and Larry Ellertson and Utah County.

Police and promoters say that more than 1,000 people were in attendance when about 90 officers from multiple agencies stormed the party in full riot gear around 11:30 p.m. on Aug. 20. With the aid of a helicopter, dogs and machine guns, police cited 60 people on a variety of charges, including resisting arrest, illegal alcohol consumption and possession of a controlled substance.

Detention records show that about 30 of those cited were booked into the Utah County Jail early on Aug. 21. Many of those arrested say they were injured by police as they were thrown to the ground and handcuffed.

Tracy claims the rave was not properly permitted. He also claimed that undercover officers planted inside the party witnessed a number of illegal activities, including drug deals before the party was busted.

But Brian Barnard, attorney for the promoters - Uprock, Inc., and the Childs Family Trust, which owns the land where the party was held - said the sheriff improperly applied the mass-gathering ordinance and had no statutory authority to shut the concert down based on the drug deals.

The ordinance in question provides a mass-gathering permit be granted by the County Commission for "an actual or reasonably anticipated assembly of [250] or more people which continues or can reasonably be expected to continue for twelve (12) or more consecutive hours."

But Tracy shut down two parties this summer, one on July 16 and the Aug. 20 event, based on his prediction that the events would exceed the 12-hour time limit and, therefore, would require the permit, according to the suit.

"The ordinance is unconstitutionally vague in that it does not give notice to law enforcement officers as to the conduct which constitutes a crime. The vaguely worded ordinance allows for arbitrary and capricious application of the ordinance by law enforcement officers," reads the suit.

Promotor Brandon Fullmer said he was aware of the need for the permit but did not expect the party to exceed the time limit. DJ bookings and contracts for concessions support his claim, according to the suit. Fullmer applied and received a mass-gathering permit for the party through the county's health department about a month before the show. The health department permit requires the promoters to show they intend to provide adequate sanitation, toilet facilities and water for the event.

At no time during that process or following the issuance of the health department permit did anyone from either the county or the sheriff's office notify Uprock that an additional permit - which provides a safety plan, event details and requires approval from the county commission - would be needed, Barnard said.

"Why didn't he just go to them and say, 'Hey, if in fact he staged this, you guys need to go get this permit,' '' he said.

Bryson said the sheriff was on solid ground in assuming the party would last more than 12 hours, having witnessed at least one other similar party this summer sail past the 12-hour mark with more than 2,000 in attendance. He said the raves present a public safety issue.

"These aren't just concerts. They are activities that have at least, if not the primary purpose, a purpose to use and distribute drugs," Bryson said, declining to comment further on the lawsuit.

Barnard said there is no law that allows officers to stop a concert because a few individuals in the audience may commit crimes.

"For the sheriff to say there were drug transactions and that's why we sent in the troopers is hogwash. This was an organized attack with the intent to scare the hell out of the kids, which they did."

[JEFFfromNC]

Last One (for now):

Rave party promoter seeks restraining order against sheriff
Written by The Salt Lake Tribune
Saturday, 10 September 2005
A temporary restraining order was sought in federal court on Wednesday against the Utah County Sheriff's Office by the promoters of a rave that was busted in Spanish Fork Canyon on Aug. 20.

The request follows a civil suit that was filed Sept. 2 seeking judicial review of the county's mass gathering ordinance and injunctive relief against the sheriff from using his discretion when enforcing the ordinance, which promoters say is vague. The temporary order seeks the same injunctive relief against the sheriff until the suit can be heard in court.

The promoters claim the sheriff inappropriately enforced the ordinance and prematurely killed the DJ-driven dance party held on the Childs family ranch in Diamond Fork.

Sheriff James Tracy said he acted within the law when he stormed the party with more than 90 officers armed with automatic weapons, riot gear, accompanied by dogs and a helicopter. He said the party was not properly permitted. But promoters say they did not need the permit in question because they did not intend their event to exceed the 12-hour time limit - a marker that requires promoters to file a safety plan and acquire approval from the county commission.

The promotor's attorney,Brian Barnard, said the sheriff built probable cause to shut the party down on his prediction of how long the party would last. The restraining order filed Wednesday requests injunctive relief from the court against Tracy.

"Plaintiffs fear that unless this court issues an immediate order, [the sheriff] will again stop concerts/events based upon the [sheriff's] predication that an event may last more than twelve hours," reads the order.

Such actions, Barnard said, equate unreasonable seizure, restriction of free expression and a denial of due process in violation of the 1st, 4th, 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution.

A hearing is scheduled before Judge Dale Kimball on Sept. 16 at 2:30 p.m..

[ScS]

thanks for keeping this updated jeff. it'll be interesting to see how all of this eventually ends. still surprising that it hasn't gotten more publicity across the country. katrina certainly didn't help but you still gotta wonder where the priorities are of our media.

http://www.sltrib.com/portlet/article/h ... le=3036997

Article Last Updated: 9/17/2005 12:45 AM

Official backs sheriff's call to bust rave
But attorney says: Drug use should have brought five arrests, not the end for a party for 1,000
By Michael N. Westley
The Salt Lake Tribune

Salt Lake Tribune

An attorney for Utah County on Friday defended a police raid of a rave in Spanish Fork Canyon on Aug. 20.
Peter Stirba said the decision by Sheriff James Tracy to bust the party was legal, based on a host of violations, including public nuisance, drug use and the promoters' failure to acquire a permit.
Stirba made his arguments at a hearing requested by promotor Brandon Fullmer and his company Uprok Inc., who on Sept. 7 asked the court to prohibit Tracy from enforcing the county's mass-gathering ordinance.
Utah County filed a written response late Thursday, just hours before U.S. District Judge Dale Kimball was scheduled to hear arguments.
At the heart of the issue is the interpretation of the ordinance, which says event planners must obtain a mass-gathering permit through the County Commission if there is a reasonable expectation that the event will continue for 12 or more consecutive hours.
But Uprok attorney Brian Barnard argued the ordinance is vague and open to too much interpretation from a sheriff with "clairvoyant powers" who can tell how long an event will last.
The event was busted after 2 1/2 hours - long before the 12-hour mark that would have broken the law, Barnard said.
Stirba claims the sheriff had concrete evidence that the event would exceed the 12-hour mark when he raided the party.
Among the evidence is a map showing that camping would be available at the site, an e-mail notice that said that music would continue until 7 a.m. and that partyers would not have to leave the property until 2 p.m. the next day.
It was also common practice that raves tend to last more than 12 hours, based on the sheriff's experience.
The sheriff has bolstered his decision to end the rave with evidence that drug use was rampant among the attendees and undercover officers conducted as many as five illegal drug transactions before the party was shut down.
On Friday, Stirba added that the sheriff had a duty to kill the party because it violated portions of a Health Department permit the promoters had obtained - inadequate sanitation, lack of proper paramedic assistance and no free water for guests.
Barnard said the sheriff has no statutory authority to end an event on behalf of the Health Department.
Five drug transactions for 1,000 people should have resulted in five arrests, not the termination of an entire party, he said.
"[The sheriff] scared the hell out of the kids and my clients," Barnard said. "[Fullmer] deserves the right to put together another party without the fear that the sheriff is going to make a bad judgment call."
Tracy assembled about 90 officers and stormed a party thrown by Fullmer on the Childs family ranch in Diamond Fork in Spanish Fork Canyon.
With the aid of dogs, guns and a helicopter, the sheriff cleared more than 1,000 attendees in less an hour.
Fullmer says the action was unnecessary, abusive and unconstitutional.
Sixty partyers were cited and about 30 were booked into the Utah County Jail on a host of charges, including resisting arrest, public intoxication, underage drinking and possession of drugs.
A ruling on the matter is expected from Kimball by the end of next week.
mwestley@sltrib.com

[ScS]

ACLU joins suit by rave organizers

Heidi Toth DAILY HERALD

The organizers of last month's rave-turned-raid say they got a boost Monday when the American Civil Liberties Union of Utah announced it was joining the lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of law enforcement's actions.

Brian Barnard, attorney for concert promoters Brandon Fullmer and Nick Mari and landowner Trudy Childs, said joining forces with the ACLU would help the lawsuit in several ways.

"One is that that means we have more resources to prepare the case and present the case," he said. "The other thing is that a national organization is taking note of what good old Sheriff Tracy is doing and questioning the way these two raids were handled."

The lawsuit was filed Sept. 20 against Utah County Sheriff Jim Tracy and one of his officers, the county commissioners, Utah County Attorney Kay Bryson and Utah County. It alleges illegal search and seizure and violations of the plaintiffs' right to be secure on their property, due process and freedom of association and free expression.

The lawsuit addresses two parties, both on 350 acres of land in Spanish Fork Canyon. The Aug. 20 concert was broken up by numerous law enforcement officials. Dozens of people were arrested on various charges of contributing to the delinquency of a minor,
resisting arrest, drug possession and disorderly conduct. Childs also was arrested.

A similar concert on July 16, which was planned by a member of the Childs family, also was broken up by law enforcement. Barnard said no reason was given for this party to be shut down.

"If they're not quiet and held in the park downtown, then there must be something wrong with them seems to be (Tracy's) attitude," Barnard said. "I think that's part of why the ACLU wanted to be involved, to help deal with that kind of stereotyping."

Margaret Plane, staff attorney for the ACLU of Utah, said she has been in contact with Barnard and participants of the party since August, and has been monitoring the case since it began.

"We've chosen to co-counsel because it implicates important First Amendment rights," she said.

"Electronic music concerts and raves are legitimate forms of artistic expression, and the ACLU's worry is that the government is targeting raves based on the alleged associated with drugs."

She said coming to the party, scaring and threatening several hundred people and arresting several because law enforcement believed a few people might be using drugs was an unconstitutional way of handling the situation.

"There were no warrants involved," she said. "It was the targeting of a concert based on inappropriate associations."

Bryson said the addition to the lawsuit is just something with which he and the other defendants will have to deal.

"It really doesn't change anything," he said.

Sgt. Darrin Gilbert with the Utah County Sheriff's Office and County Commissioner Steve White declined to comment.

Plane said allowing such parties is in the county's best interests, and officials should be working with concert promoters to make sure the events are done properly.

"What might happen is that these events get driven underground as opposed to being kind of aboveboard," she said, adding the confusion regarding permits could have been alleviated by communication from the officials. "Instead what happened was this scary raid and this illegal raid that may result in these events just going further underground and actually jeopardizing the health and safety of people who want to go to these events in the future."

Heidi Toth can be reached at 344-2543 or htoth@heraldextra.com.
This story appeared in The Daily Herald on page A1

[tim]

thanks for sticking on the story and keeping us updated.