Snyder v. Phelps et al

Filing 159

Proposed Pretrial Order submitted by Shirley L. Phelps-Roper, Rebekah A. Phelps-Davis, Albert Snyder, Fred W. Phelps, Sr, Westboro Baptist Church, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Plaintiff's Exhibit List)(Summers, Sean)

Snyder v. Phelps et al

Doc. 159

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND ALBERT SNYDER, Plaintiff Civil Action No. 06-CV-1389 RDB v. FRED W. PHELPS, SR., SHIRLEY L. PHELPS-ROPER; REBEKAH A. PHELPS-DAVIS; and WESTBORO BAPTIST CHURCH, INC. Defendants PROPOSED PRETRIAL ORDER a. A brief statement of facts that Plaintiff Albert Snyder proposes to prove in support of his claims, together with a listing of the separate legal theories relied upon in support of each claim:

By Plaintiff: Plaintiff Snyder brings this action on theories of Count I - Defamation; Count II - Invasion of Privacy - Intrusion Upon Seclusion; Count III - Invasion of Privacy - Publicity Given to Private Life; Count IV - Intentional Infliction of emotional Distress; and Count V - Civil Conspiracy. Plaintiff, Albert Snyder, is the father of Marine Lance Corporal Matthew A. Snyder (now deceased) ("Matt"); Matt was born on July 18, 1985. He joined the U. S. Marine Corps in October of 2003, was subsequently deployed to Iraq with his unit as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom and was killed on March 3, 2006, in the line of duty. Matt's family, including Plaintiff, planned a traditional Christian funeral and burial service in honor of their son, which was held on March 10, 2006, at St. John's Catholic Church, in Westminster, Maryland. On March 10, 2006, defendants protested Matt's funeral. No one invited any of the defendants to attend Matt's funeral or in any way requested their presence at such a private event. To the contrary, plaintiff requested a private funeral. Defendants maintain a website identified as www.godhatesfags.com. On the website, defendants made certain statements concerning the Snyder family. In particular, the website states "God blessed you, Mr. and Mrs. Snyder, with a resource and his name was Matthew. He was an arrow in your quiver. In thanks to God for the comfort the child could bring you, you had a DUTY to

1
Dockets.Justia.com

prepare that child to serve the LORD his GOD - PERIOD! You did JUST THE OPPOSITE- you raised him for the devil." Additionally, the website states "Albert and Julie RIPPED that body apart and taught Matthew to defy his Creator, to divorce, and to commit adultery. They taught him how to support the largest pedophile machine in the history of the entire world, the Roman Catholic monstrosity. Every dime they gave the Roman Catholic monster they condemned their own souls. They also, in supporting satanic Catholicism, taught Matthew to be an idolator." Subsequent to the funeral protest, defendants posted on their website the signs they had held at Matt's funeral. The signs defendants held at the funeral, and subsequently posted on the internet, stated: "God hates you" and "America is doomed" and "You're going to hell" and "Fag troops" and "God hates the U.S.A." and "Pope in hell in Westminster, MD" and "God's view" and "Semper Fi, Semper fags" and "Don't pray for the USA" and "God hates fags". One or more of defendants signs portrayed two men performing anal sexual intercourse. Defendants proclaimed similar statements while they were protesting Matt's funeral. Defendants' presence created a circus like atmosphere at a solemn and private event. In direct response to defendants' presence, reporters swarmed the area - further perpetuating the circus like atmosphere. In response to defendants' presence, numerous motorcycle riders attempted to block the protestors from disrupting the funeral and further harming the Snyder family. In this regard, the motorcycle riders may have mitigated the damage caused by defendants, but in any event, the riders added to the circus like atmosphere. When defendants learned of Matt's death, defendants faxed a press release concerning their protest to the media, which perpetuated the circus like atmosphere. Additionally, defendants requested police protection during the protest because defendants thought there was the potential for violence. In response to defendants' request for police protection, law enforcement deployed five sheriffs in five patrol vehicles, a SWAT team, ambulances and a Winnebago as a command and control unit. State, county and local law enforcement were deployed in response to defendants' belief that violence might occur based upon their presence. Plaintiff was damaged because of defendants' actions. In general, plaintiff's experts will collectively testify that plaintiff's diabetes was exasperated because of defendants' actions. Additionally, plaintiff was unable to go through the normal grieving process, and consequently, plaintiff has been damaged.

By Defendants: Defendants object to the foregoing statement of facts; many of the statements are not supported by the record, and have not been remotely proven; the statements are argumentative and prejudicial, designed to be inflammatory and to impose liability based on the content of religious viewpoints with which plaintiff and his counsel disagree. Further, plaintiff has stated repeatedly 2

in this record that defendants are not being sued for the content of their message; thus, any reference to any content (of signs, of Web pages, of epics, or anything else) should be disallowed. Defendants request that the Court require an objective neutral statement of facts which contains only facts that have been substantiated in this record.

b.

A brief statement of facts that each defendant proposes to prove or rely upon as a defense thereto, together with a listing of the separate legal theories relied upon in support of each affirmative defense.

By Defendants: Defendants Phelps-Davis, Phelps-Roper, Westboro Baptist Church, and Fred Phelps, Sr. (hereonin "Defendants") deny that any disruption of the funeral of Matthew Snyder occurred; or that they attended the funeral in any fashion. Instead, they stood a thousand feet away from the church where the funeral was held, out of sight and sound of anyone attending the funeral; further, that they were engaged in First-Amendment protected religious activity during all of their actions at issue in this case. Further, the funeral was not private. To the contrary, the date, time and location was published in several publications, and on the Internet; and the public at large was invited to attended. Strangers attended the funeral and burial. Dozens of members of a biker group called the Patriot Guard attended, on the invitation of plaintiff's family and the military (which invitation was made before plaintiff or anyone planning the funeral knew that defendants would be picketing in the vicinity). The bikers were immediately outside the church and the burial site, along with young students from the church's school, holding flags and signs. Thus plaintiff cannot claim that any "atmosphere" was impacted or shaped by defendants. Further, neither plaintiff nor his family saw or heard defendants at any time in person, or before, during or after the funeral. Further, the funeral was carried out in all respects as planned; no part of the funeral was changed; no ritual was canceled or altered; and the entire ceremony was done exactly as it was planned. Plaintiff did not plead in his original complaint or amended complaint that he was damaged by defendants talking to the media, which could have occurred at any location in the world. Those claims are untimely and an even grosser intrusion on First Amendment rights. Plaintiff did not plead in his original complaint or amended complaint that he was damaged by defendants allegedly creating a "circus-like atmosphere," and such could not be proven on the facts in this record, given the level of activity by other groups, for much longer periods of time, in much closer proximity to the funeral and burial. Neither of these new claims (talking to the media or circus-like atmosphere) state a claim upon which relief can be granted; plaintiff did not move to amend to add these claims; the Court has very clearly indicated that further amendments will not be allowed; no discovery has been permitted on these claims; so adding them in at this hour, through the pretrial order, is prejudicial 3

and improper. The Court has put this case on a fast track, so that new claims should not be permitted at this time. Plaintiff only claimed as to the funeral that defendants intentionally caused him emotional distress by picketing. The evidence shows that it was physically impossible for plaintiff or anyone attending the funeral to see or hear defendants. And, the only thing that distinguished defendants from many other people much closer to the funeral was the content of their signs; to allow a jury to assess damages based on content violates the First Amendment. Defendants further deny that they invaded any private matter or published any private fact. Instead, they made public comment on issues of public interest and concern, in public places and ways. The funeral of Matthew Snyder was a matter of public interest; received much public attention; and was a public topic on which defendants were as entitled to comment as anyone else. Plaintiff published the fact that plaintiff divorced his wife; defendant Phelps-Roper made religious commentary on the public fact of the divorce, which is protected under the First Amendment. Plaintiff or his family published the fact that Matthew Snyder was raised in the Roman Catholic Church. The actions of the Roman Catholic Church, in general, and specifically pertaining to the priest sex scandal, are matters of intense public interest. Defendant Phelps-Roper made religious comment on the fact that plaintiff's son was raised in the Roman Catholic Church, which is protected under the First Amendment. Any comment made by any defendant was made either on a public right of way through a picket sign or dialogue with the media, or on a passive Web site; all of which is protected speech and activity under the First Amendment. The Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of plaintiff's complaint. It is not the role of a Court to determine what religious viewpoints is accurate or sound. It violates the First Amendment to seek to impose liability for the content of religious speech on matters of public interest. The Court lacks personal jurisdiction over defendants. They lack minimum contacts either by lawful picketing or publication on a passive Web site (which plaintiff sought out voluntarily to read) to satisfy the constitutional requirements of due process. Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action for defamation; he has not proven the falsity of the statements about adultery or how he raised his son; those statements are statements of religious opinion and thus cannot subject any person to liability; and defendants have been denied necessary discovery on the question of sexual activity by plaintiff so he should not be allowed to assert a claim of defamation.

4

Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action for invasion of privacy; no private fact was disclosed; no private area was intruded into; everything defendants did was religious commentary on public information and issues in public places. Further, all of defendants' words were true, from the Scriptures and the facts (as applicable); and plaintiff has not proven (and can not prove) falsity. Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress; as a matter of fact, plaintiff had no exposure to defendants during the funeral; even if he had been exposed, the activity was protected and therefore privileged; there is no credible objective evidence of any injury; and instead all of the distress that plaintiff has experienced is because of his strong disagreement with the religious message conveyed by defendants' words, which cannot as a matter of law be made a cause of action under these facts, and doing so violates the First Amendment. Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action for conspiracy; the only thing he has shown is that defendants and church members agree with words that other church members uttered; that does not constitute a showing of conspiracy, and indeed is now going past punishing a person for words, to punishing a person for saying they agree with the words. It's difficult to imagine a more extreme violation of the First Amendment. All of defendants' acts were lawful; you can not enter a conspiracy to commit a lawful act. Plaintiff has not proven any damages of any kind, including any damage to his or his son's reputation, including any objective medical evidence that his diabetes was exacerbated, at all, let alone by defendants' actions; or any evidence of emotional injury caused by defendants, beyond a mere disagreement with words which is not actionable under the law. The evidence shows that plaintiff has had "fun" in this matter, per his writings to people who have contacted him on his Web page; and that he has fully indulged himself in a public debate on public issues, without reservation; and that any claim of emotional injury ties back exclusively to disagreement and anger over words. Defendants hereby preserve and reassert all defenses previously raised herein, including all legal and factual defenses, and all affirmative defenses. Defendants Phelps-Davis and Phelps-Roper incorporate all defenses raised by defendants Westboro and Phelps, and specifically including all arguments raised in all dispositive motions filed herein by all defendants; and all defenses and affirmative defenses raised by all answers filed to all complaints herein.

By Plaintiff: Plaintiff objects to defendants brief statement of facts.

5

c.

Similar statements as to any counterclaim, crossclaim, or third-party claim.

By Plaintiff: Not applicable.

d.

Any amendments required of the pleadings.

By Plaintiff: None. By Defendants: Defendants Phelps-Davis and Phelps-Roper preserve their objection to the amended complaint in this case as untimely filed; and object to plaintiff adding new claims (that defendants harmed plaintiff by talking to the media, or by creating a circus-like atmosphere) through this pretrial order.

e.

Any issue in the pleadings that is to be abandoned.

By Plaintiff: None By Defendants: Plaintiff has abandoned his claim for lost wages. Plaintiff should be held to have abandoned his claims for defamation, invasion of privacy and conspiracy, for failure to provide relevant discovery.

f.

Stipulations of fact or, if the parties are unable to agree, requested stipulations of fact.

By Plaintiff: None By Defendants: Defendants request a stipulation that it was not physically possible for anyone turning into the drive into the church that was used by the funeral procession to see or hear any of the picketers, based upon the physical evidence. Defendants request a stipulation to the admissibility and sufficient evidentiary foundation for the aerial map/photo of the City of Westminster Planning and Public Works Department of the area at and around Monroe and Father Joe Way in Westminster, Maryland, which has been identified and used by the parties herein. 6

g.

The details of the damages claimed or any other relief sought as of the date of the pretrial conference.

By Plaintiff: Plaintiff Snyder claims damages in an unliquidated amount for the pain and suffering caused by Defendants. Plaintiff's diabetes were exasperated and he has been psychologically harmed. Plaintiff also has requested punitive damages for defendants' intentional and outrageous conduct.

h.

A listing of each document or other exhibit, including summaries of other evidence, other than those expected to be used solely for impeachment, separately identifying those which each party expects to offer and those which each party may offer if the need arises. The listing shall indicate which exhibits the parties agree may be offered in evidence without the usual authentication. This requirement may be met by attaching an exhibit list to the pretrial order.

By Plaintiff: See exhibit list attached. By Defendants: The exhibits defendants Phelps-Davis and Phelps-Roper will use at trial are: Official aerial map/photo of Monroe and Father Joe Way, and surrounding area, in Westminster, Maryland. Video footage of Monroe and Father Joe Way and the surrounding area in Westminster, Maryland. Photos of Monroe and Father Joe Way and the surrounding area in Westminster, Maryland. Photos of Patriot Guard members at/near Monroe and Father Joe Way, and outside of St. John Catholic Church. Photos of young school children at/near Monroe and Father Joe Way, and outside of St. John Catholic Church. News stories about members of the military engaged in unlawful or immoral behavior Articles about the death of Matthew Snyder. Public notices of the funeral of Matthew Snyder, including those referring to St. John Catholic Church as his "home parish" (thus publishing that he was raised in the Catholic church/faith). 7

Agenda for the funeral of Matthew Snyder. Media items (written, electronic, TV, etc.) with Albert Snyder and his attorneys talking about Matthew Snyder and this lawsuit, with content of signs blocked out. Media items showing media coverage of the funeral of Matthew Snyder, with content of signs blocked. Notes, cards, e-mails, etc. to/from Albert Snyder about him, his son and this lawsuit. Photos of the picketers at the scene, with content of signs blocked. Records of Dr. Scott Mann. Records of Dr. Jeffrey Willard. Quality Controlled Local Climatological Data (final), Hourly Observations Table, BaltimoreWashington Intl Airport, Baltimore, MD, 3/2006. Excerpts from www.patriotguard.org about Matthew Snyder and the funeral of Matthew Snyder. March 11, 2006 article from the Carroll County Times by Isaac Baker and Ari Natter. Correspondence between Phelps-Roper and law enforcement about the March 10, 2006 picket in Westminster, Maryland (before and after). CV and report of Randall Balmer. CV and report of Dr. Neil Blumberg. CV and report of Dr. Timothy Boehm. Literature about the practice in the Roman Catholic Church of selling annulments. Articles, media items and video about the priest sex scandal in the Roman Catholic Church, including the documentary Deliver us from Evil. Court file in divorce action of plaintiff. News articles where plaintiff told of his "ex wife" thus indicating he was divorced. Articles of faith of Westboro Baptist Church.

8

Article about the first worship service of Westboro Baptist Church. Bible (electronic), King James Version. Expositions of the Bible (electronic). Documents showing the benefits received by plaintiff from the military due to the death of his son. Rebuttal exhibits depending on what claims plaintiff actually ultimately asserts at trial.

i.

A list for each party of the name, address, and telephone number of each witness, other than those expected to be called solely for impeachment, separately identifying those whom the party expects to present and those whom the party may call if the need arises.

By Plaintiff: Albert Snyder, 760 Spring Lane, York, PA 17403 Father Leo Patalinghug, Mount St. Mary's Seminary, 16300 Old Emmitsburg Road, Emmitsburg, MD 21727 Fred W. Phelps, Sr., Timothy Phelps (corporate designee) Shirley Roper-Phelps, and Rebekah Phelps-Davis as of cross. Major Thomas Long, Carroll County Sheriff's Department, 100 N. Court Street, Westminster, MD 21157 Captain Vincent Maas, Carroll County Sheriff's Department, 100 N. Court Street, Westminster, MD 21157 Sgt. David Tortora, CLB 7 Support Company EMP, MCAGCS Box 788280, 29 Palms, CA 92278

By Defendants: Albert Snyder, 760 Spring Lane, York, Pennsylvania Walter Fisher, 760 Spring Lane, York, Pennsylvania

9

Jane Perkins, 262 King St., Pottstown, Pennsylvania Tommy Perkins, 262 King St., Pottstown, Pennsylvania Jeffrey Spaulding, Police Chief, Westminster Police Department, 36 Locust St., Westminster, MD 21157 Dean Brewer, Deputy Chief, Westminster Police Department, 36 Locust St., Westminster, MD 21157 Major Thomas H. Long, Maryland State Police, 1100 Baltimore Blvd., Westminster, MD 21147 Capt. Vincent Maas, Carroll County Sheriff's Department, 100 N. Court St., Westminster, MD 21157 Gina Davis, Baltimore Sun, 501 N. Calvert St., Baltimore, MD 21278 Nicole Fuller, Baltimore Sun, 501 N. Calvert St., Baltimore, MD 21278 Jed Kirschbaum, Baltimore Sun, 501 N. Calvert St., Baltimore, MD 21278 Michele Canty, York Daily Record, 1891 Loucks Rd., York, PA 17408 Mike Argento, York Daily Record, 1891 Loucks Rd., York, PA 17408 Melissa Nann Burke, York Daily Record, 1891 Loucks Road, York, PA 17408. Lauri Lebo, York Daily Record, 1891 Loucks Rd., York, PA 17408 Jason Plotkin, York Daily Record, 1891 Loucks Rd., York, PA 17408 Marjorie Censer, Carroll County Times, 201 Railroad Ave., Westminster, MD Isaac Baker, Carroll County Times, 201 Railroad Ave., Westminster, MD Ari Natter, Carroll County Times, 201 Railroad Ave., Westminster, MD Suzanne Collins, WJZ TV, 3725 Malden Ave., Baltimore, MD 21211 Kathryn Brown, WJZ TV, 3725 Malden Ave., Baltimore, MD 21211 Todd McDermott, WUSA TV, 4100 Wisconsin Ave NW, Washington, DC Bruce LeShan, WUSA TV, 4100 Wisconsin Ave NW, Washington, DC 10

Lara Brenckle, The Patriot News, 3899 N. Front St., Harrisburg, PA 17110 Congressman John Murtha, 647 Main Street, Suite 401, Johnstown, PA 15901 Vivian Laxton, Carroll County Public Information Officer, Carroll County, Maryland Mrs. Albert (Julia) Snyder (Francis), 497 Silver Court, Westminster, Maryland Ms. Sarah Snyder, Hanover, PA Ms. Tracie Snyder, York, PA Sgt. Gary Lingrom, Casualty Assistance Officer, Box 788280, 29 Palms, California Sgt. David Tortora, CLB 7 Support Company EMP, MCAGCS Box 788280, 29 Palms, CA 92278 Jill Groff, Maryland Mark Groff, Maryland Mark Krause, Maryland Bonnie Luzby, Maryland Jim Luzby, Maryland Cathy Menafee, Maryland Grant Menafee, Maryland Carol Suchodolski, Maryland Tony Suchodolski, Maryland John Aymold, Jr., Pritts Funeral Home, 412 Washington Rd., Westminster, MD Representative of the National Weather Service, 1325 East West Highway, Silver Spring, MD Records custodians of media outlets listed above Records custodians of records of law enforcement agencies listed above

11

Records custodians of the Patriot Guard Web page Fred Phelps, Jr., 3600 Holly Lane, Topeka, KS Timothy B. Phelps, 3743 SW 12th St., Topeka, KS Fred Phelps, Sr., 3701 SW 12th St., Topeka, KS Shirley Phelps-Roper, 3640 Churchill Road, Topeka, KS Rebekah Phelps-Davis, 1216 Cambridge, Topeka, KS Christopher Letnauchyn, Carroll County Traffic Engineer, Carroll County, Maryland Father John DoBranski, Church of the Resurrection, 3177 Paulskirk Drive, Ellicott City, Lt Diana A. Lantz, CLB-7 Chaplain, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentyine Palms, California Tim Rogers, City of Westminster Public Works and Planning Department, City Hall, 1838 Emerald Hill Lane, Westminster, MD Rebuttal witnesses based upon what claims plaintiff actually ultimately presents at trial.

j.

A list for each party of the names and specialties of experts the party proposes to call as witnesses including hybrid fact/expert witnesses such as treating physicians.

Plaintiff Snyder will call the following expert witnesses: Jeffrey D. Willard, Ph.D., 807 S. George St., York, PA 17403. Dr. Willard is Plaintiff's treating psychotherapist. Scott R. Mann, M.D., 80 Wyntre Brooke Dr., York, PA 17403. Dr. Mann is Plaintiff's treating physician. Chaplain (MAJ) Terry Callis, 5 Cypress St., Canyon, TX 79015. Chaplain Callis will testify as a trained military chaplain. Kenneth J. Doka, Ph.D., 29 Castle Place, New Rochelle, NY 10805, Dr. Doka is a Licensed Mental Health Counselor (NY)

12

Plaintiff's expert witnesses have prepared reports, which have been provided to defendants. Dr. Willard and Dr. Mann are treating plaintiff and their testimony will be from a factual and expert perspective.

By Defendants: Defendants hereby preserve their objection to any testimony by Dr. Willard or Dr. Mann until the full records of both have been made available to them. Defendants hereby preserve objections to any testimony by Chaplain Callis or Kenneth Doka about any of the purposes of the rituals of funerals or burials, because the evidence establishes that not a single ritual or ceremony was disrupted, interrupted, altered, limited, or changed in any fashion because defendants picketed a thousand feet away on a public right of way, out of sight and sound, before the funeral started. It is unduly prejudicial and irrelevant what the purpose might be in anyone's mind of any of the funeral or burial rituals, given that they were not impacted. To permit detailed testimony about the purpose of the rituals would create the prejudicial and untrue suggestion that defendants somehow interfered with the rituals or ceremonies, when there is no evidence that this occurred, and to the contrary everyone has testified that everything went forward fully as planned. Defendants preserve their objection to any reference by any expert, including Kenneth Doka, to an alleged phone message on plaintiff's telephone about his son. The recording has never been produced; there is no evidence that it even happened; and there is certainly no evidence that defendants had anything to do with such an alleged message, and in fact they did not. This would be highly prejudicial and any reference to the same should be fully disallowed. Defendants identify the following expert witnesses for trial: Jeffrey T. Kramer, 12504 Quarterhorse Drive, Bowie, MD 20720 Dr. Randall Balmer, 218 Milbank Hall, 3009 Broadway, New York, NY Dr. Timothy Boehm, 10001 Lile Drive, Little Rock, Arkansas Dr. Neil Blumberg, Suite 206, Padona Centre, 30 East Padonia Road, Timonium, Maryland

By Plaintiff: Plaintiff objects to Mr. Kramer being qualified as an expert.

13

k. None.

A list of the pages and/or lines of any portion of a deposition to be offered in a party's case in chief or any counter-designations under Fed.R.Civ.P. 32(a)(4).

l.

Any other pretrial relief, including a reference to pending motions, which is requested.

By Plaintiff: Plaintiff Snyder requests that the Court deny Defendants' summary judgment motions, which are currently pending. Plaintiff will file Motions in Limine in accordance with the Court's previous Orders. Plaintiff Snyder requests the Court's permission to use an electronic evidence presentation system, which Plaintiff will provide.

By Defendants: Defendants Phelps-Davis and Phelps-Roper have a motion for summary judgment pending. Defendants will file appropriate motions in limine before the pretrial conference. Defendants Phelps-Davis and Phelps-Roper have a discovery matter/motion pending before the Court, which requests discovery on plaintiff's sexual activity, given his claim that it was defamatory to say he taught his son adultery. Defendants Phelps-Davis and Phelps-Roper reserve the right to pursue motions for fees and sanctions under Rule 11 and other appropriate authority, in light of the multiple allegations in this record by plaintiff and his counsel that were wholly without foundation in law or fact. Defendants have requested through the status report that they be permitted to use an electronic online Bible and the commentary of expositors included therewith. Defendants Phelps-Davis, Phelps-Roper, and Fred Phelps, Sr., request that the Court consider ending Court by noon on Friday, October 26, 2007, and reconvening Tuesday, October 30, 2007, so they can return to Kansas for worship service and time with their families. Defendants request that the Court go to the location of the picket at issue, and view the picket spot and the surrounding area, in connection with the summary judgment motion. And that during this site visit, that the Court drive the funeral procession route, after taking whatever measures it desires to ensure that defendants are standing where they stood during the picket, 14

with placards (without content) in their arms as they held them during the picket, to see whether the picketers were in any way visible to those turning in to the church drive, and going up to the parking lot and into the church building, as it occurred on March 10, 2006. Defendants request that if this case proceeds to trial, the Court allow the jury to go to the location of the picket at issue, and view the picket spot and the surrounding area; and that they specifically have the opportunity to have the defendants stand where they stood during the picket, and to drive themselves in vehicles on the funeral procession route (with whatever measures are necessary to assure them that while they are driving the route the picketers are standing in the same place, with placards (without content) in their arms as they did at the picket).

m.

Any other matters added by the Court.

15