HOME  |  NEWS  |  SPORTS  |  BUSINESS  |  OPINION  |  ENTERTAINMENT  |  LIFE  |  JOBS  |  CARS  |  REAL ESTATE
MARKETPLACE
Jobs
Cars
Real Estate
Shopping
Place An Ad
Classifieds
SERVICES
Subscribe
Photo Reprints
RSS Feeds
Yellow Pages
MEMORIES
Submit Announcement
News
Top StoriesEditorial/OpinionHistoryLifeMost read storiesObituariesPet of the WeekProfessional sportsSaluting Our VeteransSpeak UpSportsTeen SceneWeather
Subscriptions
Our Newspaper
Classifieds
Photo Galleries
Place Classified Ads Online
How to Place a Print Ad
Other Publications
Personals
Business Directory
Fun and Games
Personal Finance
Lifestyles
News of Delaware County Jobs
Home : News : News : Top Stories
Top Stories
Meeting disruption case goes to trial
By Phyllis Edwards, STAFF WRITER
09/29/2004
email this storyEmail to a friendpost a commentPost a Commentprinter friendlyPrinter-friendly
UPPER DARBY - An evangelical preacher whose reading of a Bible passage at the July 21 Lansdowne Borough Council meeting was termed "hate speech" by the council president will stand trial in Media for disrupting a public meeting and a related charge.

Lansdowne Police Chief Daniel Kortan was the prosecution's lone witness at Thursday's preliminary hearing before District Justice John Perfetti in Upper Darby District Court.

The chief testified that Lansdowne resident Michael Marcavage asked council a question concerning comments made by recently appointed Councilman Kevin Lee (D). Lee is the first openly gay public official in Delaware County. Marcavage then began reading from the Bible, Kortan testified.

"I went to him and appealed to him," Kortan testified. "You had the microphone long enough. It's time to sit down and enjoy the meeting like the rest of the people or leave. He refused. They (council) asked him to go back on target with a question for council instead of just reading," Kortan testified.

The council president adjourned the meeting and council members and various members of the audience filed into the hallway area. "I told him, 'now you're leaving.' He asked, 'are you arresting me?' I said, 'not yet, but you're getting close.' He said, 'I must exercise my right of civil disobedience,'" Kortan testified. He removed Marcavage using "the fireman's carry," he testified.

Marcavage's attorney, Steven Shields, argued that council had suspended the rules of order prior to opening the meeting up to public comment. Shields asked the judge to dismiss the charges.

"The council president, who I believe is Mr. (Norman) Council, said that's hate speech. What better way to squelch the messenger or silence the message than to arrest the messenger?" Shields said.

"Council perceived what he was reading as hate speech. It would be homophobic today. They couldn't let him go on. You can't go up to the podium and start reading from the Bible," Assistant District Attorney Alyssa Kusturiss countered.

Marcavage was not arrested or charged on the night of the meeting. Kortan testified he researched the law regarding disruption of a public meeting after the meeting was adjourned. "In my 24 years as a police officer I've never used the charge," Kortan said.

Judge Perfetti set an arraignment for Marcavage in Delaware County Common Pleas Court for Oct. 28 at 9 a.m. He remains free on $2,000 unsecured bail.

The judge dismissed a counter charge of disorderly conduct against Councilman Elliot Borgman (D) after hearing testimony from Marcavage and Kortan. "Mr. Borgman approached me aggressively as I was talking to Chief Kortan and debating the reason why I could not return to the meeting. Mr. Borgman whacked me with the back of his hand on my arm in the left shoulder area," Marcavage testified. "He could well have been trying to get my attention but his demeanor was anger and frustration."

"I'm embarrassed that it has gone to this point," Borgman testified. "I'm not proud of the action that I took. However, I do not feel in any way, shape or form it was detrimental."


©News of Delaware County 2009

Reader Comments
 Submit your own comment!
Added: Friday November 05, 2004 at 12:45 PM EST
I am interested in what this has to do with "christians" at all... The discussions have centered around one man's civil disobedience (which is constitutionally protected despite the intelligence with which it is dispensed).

The one thing that concerns me is the LEAP that many have made from assessing an individual's past and present civil outcry - with their own political bent - to attacking a belief system based upon a handful of people's actions!

Specifically, I would like to refute the 'strange' logic that reading a scripture reference - that possibly pertains to the matter at hand - in a public hearing is equivalent to interrupting a private worship service with heretical speech...

No. It is not "freedom OF religion" to go into someone else's worship service and spout pagan views. However, it is "freedom FROM religion" to ban teh use of ANY spiritual scripture reading from public venue simply because you do not agree with that text... Especially when that particular text is referenced in the documents which formed the nation carrying out the public hearing.

If the Quaran, Satanic Bible, or whatever book the Wiccans use in your area was being read in a public forum and the content was pertinent, then would that be violently opposed as this reading of the Bible was? I don't know; I have the sneaking feeling that most "reasonable" people would just let the individual have their say and make a sensible decision based on wht they believed... Perhaps, anti-biblical factions are affraid that these scripture reading might sway their opinions or the opinions of others with regard to matters of great import. Therefore, squelching the reading thereof would be sensorship and would be more unsettling than simply letting people read form their notes, books, or religious texts to support their opinions.

Personally, I don't have any problem with anyone reading from a book to support their opinion as long as what they are reading is not violating someone else's rights... Which, in most cases, there are laws against the type of language that could be construed as unsavory in the public context. Whether one feels threatened by 'hate speech' is not the issue. The issue is whether one feels threatened by acceptable public rhetoric and seeks to redefine that as 'hate speech' simply to keep their opinion expressions unrefuted.

Hope, Matt
Matthew Cotten
Added: Wednesday October 27, 2004 at 11:28 AM EST
Some "christians" feel that they can be as disruptive as they want, and then hide behind the fact that they were "only reading the Bible." How would they feel if a Muslim, or a Wiccan stood up in a christian service and started "preaching"? Wouldn't that be freedom of religion?

Some conservatives decide "civil disobedience" is a great thing, until they get arrested. Then they whine about how they're being persecuted. Where would the world be if true christians, like Dr. Martin Luther King, were as wimpy as this guy Mercavage? King knew that civil disobedience is only effective if you shoulder the burden and accept the consequences of your actions. Mercavage is always in the news. He forces confrontations with the police and gets himself arrested a couple of times a year. Then he sues the police for "damages," and tries to extort money from them. He will not responsibility for his actions. In my opinion, that makes him a punk.
Warren Koch
View All 40 Comments »

email this storyEmail to a friendpost a commentPost a Commentprinter friendlyPrinter-friendlyTop
CONTACT US  •  OUR PUBLICATIONS  •  PRIVACY POLICY
© 2007 Journal Register Company. All Rights Reserved.