Case for debate on Thursday, Feb. 5

Shortly after 3 a.m. on the morning of May 6, 2008, Donny Demarits was arrested by Missoula police on Broadway just east of Higgins. Dressed in jeans and a black hooded sweatshirt, he was carrying a bag with some interesting items: a pry bar, a jimmy, a lock drill, graphite lubricant, screwdrivers, a borescope, a flashlight, a wool cap, and a map of Missoula. He also had some leaflets saying “Blockbuster performance! Smash hit! America’s wiliest safecracker!"

The police arrested Donny on suspicion of burglary but had to release him because they could find no evidence he had actually broken into anything. But six weeks later, Donny was indicted by a federal grand jury under a 2001 anti-terrorism law that criminalizes the possession of documents containing information "of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism." The law also provides that a person charged with violating the law may defend against prosecution by proving that he has "a reasonable excuse for his action or possession."

Donny’s defense is that he broke no laws, he has a reasonable excuse and that the anti-terrorism law violates his First Amendment tights and is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad.

His reasonable excuse is that he was merely engaged in a type of method acting for a role in an upcoming MCT production of “The Safecracker.” It turns out that MCT was starting to produce a play of that name but tryouts hadn’t taken place yet. The leaflets, said Donny, were just a part of the method acting to help him get into the role.

If your last name begins with the letters A – M, your job as a defense lawyer is to argue that Donny’s First Amendment rights have been violated (including the vague and overbroad arguments).

If your last name begins with the letters N – Z, your job as a deputy U.S. attorney is to argue that Donny broke anti-terrorism laws and should be convicted and sent to prison.

Have fun!