Siege of Shirley Ann Allen, Roby, Illinois, Fall of 1997
The Siege of
Shirley Ann Allen by RON MARSH
Religion Editor Vigo Examiner
Excerpt from http://washingtontimes.com
site down
"Executive Assistant Police Chief Terrance W. Gainer
yesterday said he and other police officials
are working with Mr. Lowell on the
details of conducting a lie-detector
test on Mr. Condit and collecting DNA samples
from him."
Ah, yes. Terrance W. Gainer. Director
of the Illinois State Police during the infamous Siege of Shirley
Ann Allen, Roby, Illinois, Fall of 1997. Once again, "No foul
deed goes unrewarded." Royally screw up one situation, get
promoted within the system -- big time. Perhaps Mr. Condit
should familiarize himself with Mr. Gainer's past
performances. But, then, Mr. Condit himself is part and parcel
of the corrupt system and, therefore, of the problem, so the beat
merely goes on...
For those who are not familiar with the Siege
of Shirley Ann Allen -- and as a refresher for those who are -- the
following are reprints of earlier items -- Lest We Forget.
(And, NO, Mr. Executive Assistant Police Chief Terrance W. Gainer,
we who were there will NEVER forget!!)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The
Siege of Shirley Ann Allen
By Ron Marsh
(WARNING! Trying to understand the siege of
Shirley Ann Allen may be hazardous to your own mental health: You
may become more befuddled than she is alleged to be.)
They say that they are there for her own good -- for her safety and
protection -- yet they have denied her electricity, gas, water and
telephone for over a month.
They say that they are concerned
about her mental stability, yet for the first ten days of the siege
they tormented her with incessant noise: calling out to her over a
bullhorn every fifteen minutes, day and night, and bombarding her
with loud music and gibberish over a PA system at any and all
hours.
(Sleep deprivation is a fundamental tool in the science of
brainwashing: disorient the subject; totally break the subject;
reduce the subject to mental and physical putty; re-mold the
subject into your own desired image.)
They say that she might be
a danger to others; therefore, they have denied her access to
friends, relatives, legal counsel, even a minister -- in spite of
the fact that they offer no evidence that she ever has demonstrated
unprovoked hostility toward anyone.
They say that she might be a
danger to herself, yet they have subjected her to deprivation and
torment that would have driven many "normal" persons to
suicide.
If Shirley Allen were a convicted criminal, she would be
afforded better than that.
If she were a prisoner of war,
the Geneva Convention would guarantee her the necessities of life
and humane treatment.
If she were a mongrel dog in the local
animal shelter, she would fare better than she has fared at the
hands of the Christian County Sheriff's Department and the Illinois
State Police.
The overriding problem in reporting the siege of
Shirley Allen is the very isolation to which she has been
unmercifully subjected. No one -- no reporter, no relative, no
attorney, no minister -- has been permitted to get within half a
mile of her. And her phone has been rendered inoperative.
Because of that imposed isolation, there is so little that we truly
know for sure.
We do know that she has been charged with no
crime, yet she is being hounded like a caged rat.
At the
mundane level, we know that for over a month Shirley Allen has not
been able to flush her toilet...or take a bath...or wash her
hair...or wash and dry a load of clothes...or call out for a pizza
(or a minister)...or light her furnace, even in recent nights when
temperatures have dropped to freezing or below.
In spite of the
fact that her tormentors "think" that she might have Sterno or a
propane stove, there is reason to believe that she has not been able
to cook a meal in over a month. Even if her nephew is correct, that
Shirley has home-canned food to last for months, cold green beans
from a Mason jar are not very tasty. (And I do mean "cold" -- she
can't use her furnace, so even "room temperature" takes on a whole
new meaning for Shirley Allen!)
Even if she has a reasonable
supply of bottled water -- and no one knows that for sure -- she
probably would not "waste" it for non- essentials; therefore, she may
not have brushed her teeth for over a month.
Some would
say, "Well, a person must have something wrong mentally to endure
all that for over a month."
Well, even with that as a given (and
it is not a given), is that the way our society treats persons who
are mentally troubled?
Illinois statutes regarding involuntary
psychiatric treatment repeatedly specify that the subject must be
demonstrably "mentally ill and dangerous." (Check it out at 405 ILCS
5/3-701 et sequitur.)
Thus far, no one outside of "law
enforcement" has suggested publicly that Shirley Allen is
"dangerous" -- not her friends, not her family, not her enemies (if
she has enemies).
In fact, according to newspaper reports, she
never has been considered suicidal by friends, family or medical
professionals, even during alleged bouts with depression.
As to her being a danger to anyone else, as recently as Thursday,
October 23, Illinois State Police Director Terrance Gainer is quoted
as saying "Mrs. Allen hasn't shown that kind of hostility."
Only
the Christian County Sheriff's Department and the Illinois State
Police have made a determination that Shirley Allen is dangerous.
Are we to assume, therefore, that a psychiatric or psychologic
license is now a requisite for becoming a deputy sheriff or a state
trooper? They apparently perceive themselves to be so
credentialed.
Or, as some suggest, is this whole debacle simply a
matter of "Machismo"? Could it possibly be that certain men, the
type who strap on their manhood with their gunbelts, just can't
afford to lose face to a 51-year-old widow woman?
* * * * *
Where and how did it all begin?
The siege
of Shirley Allen began September 22, 1997; the saga of Shirley Allen
began more than twenty years earlier.
According to newspaper
reports, Shirley Ann Dugger met John Allen in 1974, when Shirley, a
registered nurse, was 28 years old. John, then 53 and a widower for
two years, had suffered a heart attack; Shirley was his
nurse.
In 1975, Shirley Dugger and John Allen married -- a
marriage that was to last 14 years until John's death from
pancreatic cancer in 1989.
In spite of the fact he had
four children from his first marriage, John Allen reportedly left
his entire $120,000 estate, including the house now under siege in
Roby, to Shirley Ann. The house and accompanying 47 acres are now
reportedly valued at $146,000.
As is often the case, Shirley
reportedly suffered bouts of depression after John's death. After
all, they apparently had been an exceptionally happy couple,
enjoying many of life's experiences together -- from gardening to
touring the country, with Shirley in the sidecar of John's
motorcycle.
The tighter the bond, the greater the loss.
Just how deep were those bouts of depression is a matter of pure
conjecture, but a matter that has been effectively used by Shirley's
tormentors to cloud the fundamental and troublesome issue: whether
Shirley has been accorded due process during -- and prior to -- the
siege.
As to Shirley's mental condition, stories in the
(Springfield) "State Journal-Register" reveal an interesting
diversity of opinions.
On the one hand, there are the
views of Shirley's "non-official" acquaintances:
* 9/25:
"I don't think she'd hurt anybody. She's always been alright with
me." (Darel Patrick, neighbor who has known her for 20
years.)
* 9/25: "She always kept a perfect garden, with beautiful
flowers, and her yard was always kept nice." (Mamie Stone, neighbor,
who also described Shirley as friendly, reserved and a
self-proclaimed "recluse, even in school.")
* 9:29:
"There was no reason for the injunction at all. If they would just
leave her alone she would be fine. Her behavior may look strange,
she's a little eccentric, but it's not strange in my eyes. I would
guess that she's frightened they're going to take her away and she's
never going to see her home again." (Step- daughter Betsy Tonias,
John's daughter by his first wife. Tonias reportedly believes that
Shirley slipped into depression since John's death, but doubts that
she suffers from more severe mental illness.)
* 9/29:
"She struck me as being a very loving person who had a lot of love
to give. When she met [John], he just filled her life with
happiness, and I'll guarantee you that she's still mourning his
death." (Lorraine Fleck, counselor and employee of the Sangamon
County circuit court. She has sought, and been denied, police
clearance to approach Shirley during the siege.)
* 10/25: "About
99 percent of the people in here are for Shirley." (Marilyn
Carpenter, owner of the Buckhart Tavern, the nearest neighborhood
restaurant-bar, about 3 miles from Shirley's home.)
On the other
hand, there are the "official" opinions:
* 9/25: "She was just a
little paranoid; she was never like this. She was never to the point
of being where we thought she should be committed." (Sheriff Dick
Mahan)
(Of course, she never had been set upon by armed men and
tear- gassed before, either.)
* 9/25: "When you have a
mentally unstable person, we're not sure how effective it would be."
(State Police Lt. Dennis Sloman, commenting on the cutting-off of
Shirley's utilities.) "And it's not that I think she would harm
somebody, it's just that you can't take that chance."
(Sloman)
* 9/26: "We've got a poor woman suffering a bout of
mental illness." (Gene Marlin, "right-hand-man" to state police
director Terrance Gainer.)
* 9/27: "We intend to stay
until we can get Mrs. Allen the medical treatment she needs."
(Terrance Gainer, Director of the State Police, who also has stated
that his men would remain even if the judge rescinds the order for
involuntary psychiatric evaluation.)
* 10/03: "We're trying to
withdraw to give her some space...perhaps she'll then exit the house
and we will then be able to get her to the hospital care she needs."
(Gainer)
And both lists of quotes could go on ad nauseam.
To those who know Shirley, she may be a recluse who misses her
husband; she is not "mentally ill" and/or "dangerous" and she should
have been left alone.
In the minds of "law enforcement," she
should be committed.
Again it must be asked: Is a psychiatric or
psychologic license now a requisite to becoming a deputy sheriff or
a state trooper?
If not, how can these cops be so cocksure that
Shirley Allen conforms to the statutory definition of a person who
is mentally ill and dangerous and in need of involuntary psychiatric
evaluation/treatment -- and be so hell bent to see that she
receives it?
* * * * *
The issue at hand is not Shirley Ann Allen's mental
stability; the issue at hand is due process of law.
Article 5 of the Bill of Rights provides, in pertinent part: "No
person shall be...deprived of life, liberty, or property, without
due process of law."
Process for involuntary psychiatric
evaluation/committal is defined by Illinois statute at 405 ILCS
5/3-70, et seq. (It's a lousy statute, and probably blatantly
unconstitutional, but that is another matter.)
Shirley
Allen certainly has been deprived of her liberty. Has she been
accorded due process of law?
The judge has conveniently sealed
the court record, so neither the form nor the substance of the
"order" can be known. (This in a land of a supposedly open
judiciary?)
Article 4 of the Bill of Rights provides, in
pertinent part: "The right of the people to be secure in their
persons, houses...against unreasonable...seizures, shall not be
violated."
Can "law enforcement" personnel comprehend the
difference between being "secure" and being "secured" (as in "house
arrest")? Shirley Allen's house has become her prison. Does this
conform to either the letter or the spirit of the 4th
Amendment?
Article 4 of the Bill of Rights also provides, in
pertinent part: "No warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,
supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing
the...persons...to be seized."
Apparently, no warrant has
issued. By what authority, then, does the judge issue an
"order"...and does "law enforcement" attempt to execute such an
"order"...and does the statute purportedly allow for such an
"order"...to seize the person of Shirley Allen?
Article 5 of the
Bill of Rights provides, in pertinent part: "No person...shall be
compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against
himself."
Article 6 of the Bill of Rights provides, in pertinent
part: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the
right...to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to
be confronted with the witnesses against him...and to have the
assistance of counsel for his defense."
I promised you that
trying to understand the Shirley Allen travesty of injustice might
"befuddle" you.
Well...White water ahead. Hang on!
At
recent rallies in support of Shirley, speakers belabored the point
that Illinois' statutes regarding involuntary psychiatric
evaluation/committal are "bad law" because they do not conform to
constitutional guarantees that protect a person from "being
compelled to be a witness against himself"...or that allow him "to
be confronted with the witnesses against him."
The action against
Shirley Allen is purported to be merely civil; these guarantees are
for criminal defendants. Are an unkempt yard and reclusion now
"criminal" offenses? "Quasi" criminal?
"Well, shouldn't a
defendant in a civil matter be afforded the same protections as the
defendant in a criminal matter?"
Both reason and passion would
argue, "Yes."
But the answer goes to the very heart of the
differences between criminal and civil actions. In a civil action,
the defendant knows his accuser; he is the plaintiff. In a criminal
action, the state is the plaintiff, bringing action for and on the
behalf of the "accuser."
We have totally lost this
concept as "compelled-compliance regulation" has insidiously usurped
Common Law. The Founders understood the concept well: hence the
constitutional restraints upon "government as plaintiff."
Finally: if it is a civil action, why is the subject of a
involuntary psychiatric evaluation/committal afforded the right to a
court-appointed attorney (405 ILCS 5/3-805)?
Has Shirley Allen
been accorded due process?
Until both the "nature and cause of
the accusation" have been defined (6th Amendment), expect any
"official" response to that question to be mere
circumlocution!
For a synopsis of the statutes, see the pertinent
statement by Jay A. Miller, Executive Director, Illinois Civil
Liberties Union at http://www.aclu-il.org/.
Sorry
to leave you in white water. More later?
The questions go
on.
As does the Siege of Shirley Allen...
Copyright
(c) 1997 by Ron Marsh Ron@Vigo-Examiner.com
Permission granted to reproduce in full or in part, with
full attribution, for non-commercial purposes only.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Watching
The Watchers
by Ron Marsh
His name is Montgomery.
He keeps a
lonely vigil: Watching The Watchers.
It was about 2:30, Sunday,
October 19, a bright, warm, autumn afternoon, when I turned south
off County Highway 2 into the "media staging area," a block or so
east of the intersection with County Highway 23 and just west of The
Watchers' checkpoint. I had been there the previous Tuesday
afternoon, between the noon rally in Taylorville and the 5:00 rally
outside the Capitol Building in Springfield.
The Watchers
were still there, as they had been on Tuesday, but their presence
was no longer stifling. On Tuesday, there had been two dozen or more
Watcher vehicles lining the road. This afternoon, there were only
two, at times three -- and no doubt another two or three at the
other checkpoint about a half-mile farther east.
I left
The Watchers behind and entered the media staging area. (Where I
hail from, we would have considered that a mighty high- falutin' name
for half an acre of meadowland, but that was what The Watchers were
calling it.)
Then I saw it, maybe 400 yards straight ahead: A
mute symbol of proud defiance, a bright ray of hope in an otherwise
bleak and oppressive scene.
From the media staging area,
the rolling farmland sloped downward, away from the road and The
Watchers, then upward again. And atop that second hill --
overlooking the media staging area, the road and The Watchers --
someone had parked a camper, with an American flag raised
heavenward.
I had to meet the owner of that camper.
The two males and two females sitting outside the camper watched as
I parked my car. As I began walking toward them, they stood up and
started toward me. We met in the hollow between the hills.
I
introduced myself. The portly, forty-ish man and the two teen- aged
girls said "Good-bye" about as soon as they said "Hello," got into
the only other car in the media staging area, and left.
I offered
my hand to the owner of the camper. "I don't believe I caught your
name."
"Oh, it's Montgomery," he replied. "Sorry. I should have
told you before." He shook my hand.
"That's OK," I
assured him.
His hand was coarse -- much coarser than mine. He
wore fading work jeans, a red and blue plaid shirt and a "camo"
hunting cap. He was any plumber or electrician or bricklayer that
you might see at any construction site.
"'Montgomery.' Is
that first name or last?"
"Yeah."
That was OK, too. I
could tell he was used to the question; I was satisfied with the
answer.
"Could we sit and talk awhile?" I asked, nodding toward
the camper.
"Sure." We climbed the hill and entered
Montgomery's "sitting room" just outside the camper. The plush
carpet was trodden meadow grass. There was one blinding yellow light
set firmly in the blue- sky ceiling. The furnishings were simple: two
white molded-plastic chairs, a bale of straw for a couch.
I settled my 250 pounds gingerly into the flimsy plastic. "Where ya
from, Montgomery?"
"From inside the camper," he said, nodding
over his right shoulder.
"That's about it, these days.
I've been pretty much all over the country in it the last coupla
years. Heard about what was happening here and just thought this
would be a good place to call home for a while."
"OK." I
could tell he was used to the question; I was satisfied with the
answer. In these circumstances, prudence demands walls between
strangers.
The camper was vintage Chevy: larger than a pickup,
yet lacking the dignity to be called a motor home. It had seen many
seasons and, no doubt, many miles. In spots, paint had given way to
patina -- if aging aluminum is noble enough to wear patina.
Affixed to the side of the camper, just behind the passenger door,
was a makeshift flagpole. The gentle breeze held the flag at proud
attention -- not the garish, impudent pride of a half-time parade
flag, but the indomitable assurance of a veteran of a thousand Iwo
Jimas.
Its faded reds and blue and dingy whites were dim reminder
of a glory that once was -- and of the pervasive shame that now is
Roby, Illinois.
The presence of both flag and camper,
atop the hill and overlooking The Watchers, seemed to hallow the
meadow.
Montgomery removed his cap, smoothed his hair, replaced
the cap. His reddish hair seemed uncomfortably full, as if it had
missed a trim or two.
"So, what's been
happening?"
"Well," he said, "I think I've played my
psychological game with them just about as far as I can play it. I
was parked over in the media staging area for a while. Then I moved
up here. That really seemed to make them nervous. They don't seem to
like it that I am up here looking down on them. We just sit here
most of the time and look at each other through binoculars. And I
have a video camera."
Hmm. They charge that Shirley Allen
is mentally ill...but paranoia also is a mental illness. I wondered
just who should be evaluating whom.
Montgomery continued:
"They came up here and asked to search the camper. I said, 'No.'
Finally they told me they were going to search it anyway. I threw
the keys inside and locked the door, so they would have to break in
if they were going to search. Figured I might get them for something
there.
"That just made them mad. One of them grabbed me and
pulled my hands around behind my back, to handcuff me. As he went
for his cuffs, I reminded him of the Bill of Rights and of unlawful
searches and of his oath to the Constitution. I told him that what
he was doing was unconstitutional and a violation of his
oath.
"I don't think they liked it much, but they let me go.
After they left, I had to break into my own camper to get my
keys.
"Now we just watch each other.
"I'm afraid that
they will ask the guy who owns the land to ask me to leave. If they
do, I hope he doesn't cave in."
He removed the cap again,
re-sized it and put it back on.
A reporter pulled into the media
staging area, got out of his pickup and walked toward The
Watchers.
"It's so silly," Montgomery pondered. "They take down
everybody's license plate number. They don't realize that the people
who come here are decent, law-abiding people who are just concerned
about Shirley."
Yeah. Paranoia, I thought again.
We talked for forty-five minutes or so, about the Bible and the
Constitution and Shirley Allen and The Watchers.
He turned his
chair once, away from the setting sun. And there was that "cap
thing" every few minutes. Montgomery was a quiet man, not a
grandstander. But I was certain: in his case at least, still waters
surely did run deep.
Unless unpreventably hindered, or until the
camper became too cold to endure, he would be there for the duration
-- watching The Watchers.
While we had talked, the dark
clouds had been rapidly approaching.
The blinding light in
Montgomery's sitting-room ceiling was no more. The warm autumn
breeze had abruptly turned chilly.
The man and the girls
returned.
"They're back," Montgomery said. "Those are his
daughters. They are home-schoolers from Decatur. He thought this
would make a nice field trip for the girls, to see what was going on
over here. They just went to get something to eat."
As
the trio climbed the hill with their bags of Subway sandwiches and a
cooler of soft drinks, I said my farewells to Montgomery.
Then I
left them to enjoy their supper.
As I headed back down County
Highway 23 toward Taylorville and home, I looked one last time over
my left shoulder at the rolling meadow, the "media staging area" and
the camper.
Mentally, I saluted the flag.
"Good-bye,
Montgomery. And God be with you!"
At least The Watchers have no
doubt that they, too, are being watched.
Copyright (c)
1997 by Ron Marsh Ron@Vigo-Examiner.com
Permission granted to reproduce in full or in part, with full
attribution, for non-commercial purposes only.
|
|