NATO 3 Trial Concludes

Jury Begins Deliberating Our Comrades' Fates The closing arguments in the NATO 3 trial concluded today and the jury began deliberations to determine whether each of them will be convicted or acquitted on each of the seven charges

The closing arguments in the NATO 3 trial concluded today and the jury began deliberations to determine whether each of them will be convicted or acquitted on each of the seven charges they are facing. The jury was released for the evening at about 11pm and are scheduled to return at 9am tomorrow to continue deliberations. They must keep deliberating until they reach a verdict.

Brent, Jared, and Brian looked focused and determined in court today, although they must have been stressed and exhausted beyond all belief. We will keep you updated on how they are doing as we hear more from them. We are also working on our in-depth notes on the closing arguments, but you can get a good glimpse into what went down in court today by checking out our Twitter rundowns!

State's Closing Arguments:

Church's Closing Arguments:

Betterly's Closing Arguments:

Chase's Closing Arguments:

State's Rebuttal Arguments:

Jury Instructions:

At this point, we have no idea how long deliberations will last or what the verdict is likely to be. Thus, we have no idea whether to brace ourselves for long-term prisoner support or to start organizing our long-awaited victory party! While we wait, please send the NATO 3 a note to let them know that they are not alone in this ordeal!

Brent Betterly
PO Box 089002
Chicago, IL 60608

Brian Church
PO Box 089002
Chicago, IL 60608

Jared Chase
PO Box 089002
Chicago, IL 60608



The so-called NATO 3 were convicted today of two counts of mob action, but not the more serious charges of terrorism.

In closing rebuttal to jurors after the defense lawyers had spoken, Blakey gave each defendant a nickname — calling Church “Mr. Cop-on-Fire,” Chase “Captain Napalm” and Betterly “Professor Molotov” — and accused them of trying to conceal their violent plans “behind the legacy of nonviolent protest.”

Ugh, what snide little nicknames.

Do we know what the sentence will be for the "mob action" conviction?

Can't blame the defendants for trying to escape political persecution but allowing their defense team to portray them as confused and stupid is kind of nauseating. Maybe they've been conditioned to believe that by those claiming to represent their interests, but clearly the narrative is one that's meant to undermine the credibility of militant anarchist resistance, which doesn't appear to have been challenged in any meaningful way here.

Agreed. Usually it's remorse and renouncement, this time it's bumbling stupidity. Whatever narrative can be sold to the jury. I think this is largely a consequence of anarchism being so completely marginal in the US--there's no way to stick to your guns and look remotely credible or relatable to a jury, there's just too much ideological and emotional distance between your average militant anarchist and your average juror. Of course, going along with this kind of portrayal only worsens the situation. But in the defendants' place, I probably would have done the same. Hell, they're still looking at a possible max sentence of 30 years for the lesser charges they were convicted of, and that's with the terrorism stuff off the table.

But you are blaming them... You might have a point if the difference was a few more months in jail, a felony on your record, etc. but these were terrorism charges. If they weren't portrayed as confused and stupid, they would have picked up two counts that carry 20-life sentences as opposed just to the two arson related convictions that carry 4-30 year sentences. And all for a couple days of a more favorable media narrative?

truth is they were basically oogles who got set up by pigs for talking way too much shit.

Who would have thought state made molotovs are worse than dropping TWO atomic bombs on civilian populations, AND helping Nazi war criminals escape to South America! Never in Amerikkka, where brown people had to be killed off so that one group of white men could masturbate over which people to trap in their beloved cages. Such wonderful national rituals.

Why even keep up with the appearances needed to promote such cartoon talk?

Just say it: "We don't like you. Live in our cages."

And then after that build more cages because we need more cages and then need to find more people to put in cages because we need cages because without them people will cross the invisible lines we make up just to put people in cages and make sure there are enough cages to put people in.

And...boom! A new hobby,ritual, amerikkkan pasttime.

Anything to keep from asking, "Why cages?" Because the answer will be, "What where you wearing? What were you thinking? What were you doing? Well, that's why (you got raped by the system)."

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Enter the code without spaces.
Subscribe to Comments for "NATO 3 Trial Concludes"