UC REGENTS V. PAMELYN FERDIN

Jan 01, 2009

OUTCOME: CONVICTION VACATED

George Seide Defends Animal Rights Activist & Child Star Attorney George N. Seide, of Adelman & Seide, LLP, was recently appointed to represent Pamelyn Ferdin, a well known animal rights activist an ... d child star, who was the original voice of Lucy Van Pelt in three “Charlie Brown” television specials. Ms. Ferdin was peacefully protesting in Los Angeles on June 14, 2008, handing out fliers opposing primate research at UCLA, which contained the residence addresses, phone numbers and email addresses of four researchers, which she downloaded from a web site: uclaprimatefreedom.org. That act was the basis for her being tried and convicted of Contempt of Court. Ms. Ferdin was charged with one count Contempt of Court (violation of a Court Order) by the Regents, through their retained lawyers from the mega law firm of Irell and Manella. She was convicted of that one count of Contempt on November 6, 2008, of acting in concert with parties named in the injunction, with inferred knowledge of the terms of the injunction, which had never been served on Ferdin, and she potentially faced, among up to 120 hours of court ordered community service and up to a $1,000 fine, up to five days incarceration. Neither Judge Terry B. Friedman, who arraigned Ms. Ferdin, nor Judge John L. Segal apprised Ms. Ferdin of her rights under the U.S. Constitution, stated George Seide, Esq., Ms. Ferdin’s court appointed counsel. Mr. Seide was appointed to represent Ferdin, when her right to counsel, protected by the 6th Amendment, was brought to the Court’s attention. Mr. Seide first represented Ferdin at the hearing on the date set for her sentencing and for argument on the Motion to Vacate her Contempt Conviction and was successful in arguing that Ferdin was not advised of her right to have counsel present at every proceeding and that counsel could be appointed for her. Mr. Seide also argued that Ferdin was not advised that she had the 5th Amendment Right against self-incrimination. She did not have to file any responsive pleadings, nor take the stand and testify, and she did both. In this instance the Court made the correct judgment, recognized its serious errors and vacated the guilty verdict. The Court did not rule on Mr. Seide’s oral motion to dismiss the charges based on a ‘double jeopardy’ argument, but set the matter for a hearing for a written double jeopardy motion and for a new trial. Even more mistakes were made. The Trial was returned to the Judge who issued the Injunction, who is precluded from hearing the Contempt, so it will have to be reassigned. The Motion for Dismissal was calendared for hearing on the same date as the second Contempt Trial. That means the parties must prepare for Trial, subpoena witness, etc. and on the day set for Trial the contempt charge against Ms. Ferdin may be dismissed. That’s a lot of wasted attorney fees! The Motion should be heard first and if denied then a Trial date should be set. Mr. Seide was confident the Motion would be granted, but even if it is not, now that Ferdin has knowledgeable counsel, there are too many obstacles for the Regents to overcome in their case and Ms. Ferdin will be acquitted. Mr. Seide is appalled that the Regents are going to retry Ms. Ferdin, considering the amount of money the Regents spent prosecuting the first Trial. Certainly, now that Ms. Ferdin has counsel, the Regents will incur even greater attorney costs than they did from the first trial. It has been reported that Irell and Manella had attorney fees and costs between $20,000 -$30,000 through the first Trial.