A federal jury deliberated all day Wednesday before returning a verdict Thursday, convicting the activists on one of two criminal charges.
Read this article at the Tampa Bay Times.
By Dan Sullivan
Tampa Bay Times
Sept. 12, 2024
TAMPA — The Uhurus said their support of Russia was free speech. On Thursday, a federal jury said it was a crime.
After a weeklong trial that touched on complicated issues of national security, foreign relations and the limits of the First Amendment, a panel of eight men and four women found three members of the St. Petersburg-based African activist group guilty of conspiring to act as unregistered Russian agents. But the jury found the group not guilty of the more serious charge of acting as agents of a foreign government.
The defendants showed no immediate reaction as U.S. District Judge William Jung announced the verdict Thursday morning.
Minutes later, though, their mood was jubilant as they strode out of the courtroom on the arms of supporters who had watched the trial closely.
“Relentless!” declared Omali Yeshitela, the longtime leader of the Uhuru Movement and its umbrella organization, the African People’s Socialist Party. “Uhuru!”
Penny Hess, 78, and Jesse Nevel, 34, members of the group’s white allies, were also found guilty for their respective roles in what federal prosecutors described as a seven-year conspiracy to sow discord and enflame American political tensions at the behest of Russia.
A fourth defendant, Augustus C. Romain Jr., a former Uhuru member who in 2018 founded the Atlanta-based Black Hammer Party, was also convicted of conspiracy.
The conspiracy charge, the less serious of the two charges, carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison. No sentencing date has been set.
“The most important thing is they were unable to convict us of working for anybody except Black people,” Yeshitela said in a news conference afterward on the front steps of the U.S. District Courthouse. “I am willing to be charged and found guilty of working for Black people.”
Behind him, supporters raised fists and again shouted “Uhuru!” The Swahili word means “freedom.”
Yeshitela praised their lawyers, calling them a “legal dream team that was a nightmare for the prosecution.”
“This doesn’t stop here,” said Mutaqee Akbar, who represents Nevel. “We will appeal this.”
Hess’ attorney, Leonard Goodman, said he wasn’t sure why the jury reached the verdict that they did. He speculated that they may not have fully understood the charges. He reiterated the defense’s argument that the government prosecuted the Uhurus to censor them for their pro-Russian views.
“This case has always been about free speech,” he said.
The trial capped a two-year legal saga that began when FBI agents raided the Uhuru House in southern St. Petersburg and several other properties connected to the group. An indictment unsealed the same day detailed allegations that a Russian man, Aleksandr Ionov, had worked for years to foster relationships with American activist groups in an effort to exploit and enhance U.S. political divisions and spread pro-Russian disinformation.
Ionov, 34, runs the Anti-Globalization Movement of Russia, an organization funded by the Russian government, whose stated mission includes support for the nation’s sovereignty and security.
In 2015, Ionov invited Yeshitela to Moscow to discuss future cooperation. Prosecutors alleged he offered to pay the Uhuru Movement and spread their message to an international audience in return for their assistance in carrying out various actions and events.
Upon his return to the U.S., Yeshitela, 82, told other members of the African People’s Socialist Party that it appeared Ionov’s group was an “instrument of the Russian government” and that “does not disturb us.”
In the years that followed, the Uhuru Movement took on a decidedly pro-Russia bent. At Ionov’s behest, prosecutors said, they published Russian propaganda, including articles written by him in their newspaper, the Burning Spear, hosted him in videoconferences and organized protests featuring Russian messaging and disinformation.
Ionov had a similar relationship with Romain’s group. Evidence presented at trial showed he enlisted Romain, 38, to organize three different protests in Atlanta and California featuring pro-Russian messages.
The Uhurus were unaware that Ionov communicated regularly about his meddling in the U.S. with intelligence officers in Russia’s Federal Security Service, the defense said. He issued reports about his activities with the Uhurus and other groups with the agency and followed through on orders to carry out actions.
Prosecutors described him as a middleman between Russian intelligence and the Uhuru Movement, over which they said he exercised “direction and control.” The connection, the government argued, effectively made the Uhurus act as Russian agents.
The defense adamantly denied that Ionov controlled the group.
“Omali Yeshitela is not for sale,” his attorney, Ade Griffin, told the jury in closing arguments.
Among the evidence they highlighted was a Facebook message Yeshitela sent to Ionov in 2016. In it, he stressed that the nature of their cooperation with him was as “allies not employees.” The defense noted that Yeshitela and others sometimes refused to do things Ionov asked of them.
Romain, who represented himself through most of the trial, tried to suggest in cross-examination of witnesses that the FBI targeted the group in a bid to silence criticism of President Joe Biden.
His questioning and arguments, which often veered off topic, drew frequent objections from prosecutors. At one point, he questioned why the FBI hadn’t arrested “bigger fish.”
“What kind of a fool arrests the small fish while letting the big fish go free?” he asked.
Romain relented in his self-representation only when it came time for closing arguments. His standby attorney, Mark O’Brien, delivered arguments on his behalf with scant time to prepare.
None of the jurors were African American, a fact not overlooked by the defense.
The panel originally included one Black woman, but she was dismissed after she did not appear at the start of the trial’s second week.
Akbar, Nevel’s attorney, asked that the woman be replaced by an alternate juror who was also Black, saying he didn’t think the remaining panel would reflect a cross-section of the community. But the judge declined, citing federal court rules that state alternate jurors must replace jurors in the same sequence in which they were selected.
Midway through their deliberations, which lasted about 10 hours over three days, the jury asked for copies of the indictment, their instructions and a PowerPoint presentation the government showed during closing arguments. The presentation, which included a breakdown of the elements of the charged crimes, was unavailable, as it was not entered into evidence at trial.
Late Wednesday, the jury asked for their names and identifying information to be sealed from the public record, a request the judge granted.
In a gathering after the verdict the Uhuru House, Akbar said the split verdict sends a message to the U.S. government that “political prosecutions won’t work.” But he urged the group to exercise caution going forward.
”I think we’ve got to be careful who we talk to and who we email … but not shut up,” Akbar said. “I think we will always be in jeopardy when we do the right thing.”
Times staff writer Jack Prator contributed to this report. Read this article at the Tampa Bay Times.
Comments