Pittsburgh activist found not guilty of obstruction in 2019 incident
Share this post:
A well-known Pittsburgh activist was found not guilty Thursday of obstruction in connection with a 2019 incident in Wilkinsburg.
Nicky Jo Dawson, 28, had been charged with obstruction, disorderly conduct and jaywalking.
A criminal complaint filed against her said Wilkinsburg police were conducting a traffic stop on Peebles Street just before 11 p.m. Sept. 28, 2019, as part of a drug investigation during which two men were detained.
During the stop, the complaint alleged that Dawson, who had been across Penn Avenue, crossed the street and began recording. The prosecutor in the case said Dawson was asked between 10 and 20 times to step back but refused.
At one point, the complaint said, Dawson walked directly between the officer’s and suspects’ vehicle, passing within a foot or two of both the officers and one of the suspects.
The complaint alleges that Dawson distracted officers from performing their duties and endangered those on the scene. Officers told Dawson they were charging her with obstruction and took her into custody, but she refused to provide her name or identification, the complaint said. She was taken to Allegheny County Jail and released the next day on nonmonetary bond.
Prior to the start of trial Thursday before Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Kelly Bigley, Dawson’s attorney successfully argued for the jaywalking and disorderly conduct charges to be dismissed.
Frank Walker argued that the disorderly conduct statute under which Dawson was charged requires unreasonable noise, yet there was no evidence presented in which she yelled or screamed. In addition, he said that no officer showed that she had jaywalked in a way that interfered with traffic, as is required by the statute.
Bigley agreed with Walker and dismissed those counts. Later, the judge said the case represented both bad charging, as well as bad screening decisions.
As for the obstruction charge, Walker argued that his client did not interfere with the arrests being made that night.
“They could complete all of their tasks despite Ms. Dawson’s conduct,” Walker said.
Assistant District Attorney Alex Wilkinson said that’s not what the law says. If society followed Walker’s interpretation, Wilkinson said, “Anyone could do or get away with anything. That’s an absurd result.”
Wilkinson told Bigley that the officers did not care that Dawson was recording them. Instead, it was that she was so close to them as they tried to execute an arrest, and therefore created a dangerous situation.
“She was given numerous opportunities to back up. She refused to do so. She did everything possible to prevent this arrest from successfully occurring,” he said.
Bigley agreed with the prosecution that Dawson’s actions were dangerous, noting that she got “perilously close” that night. She could have stood further away and continued recording, Bigley said.
The judge also said that to be guilty of obstruction, a person has to “intentionally” act to obstruct or interfere. In this case, Bigley said, that intent wasn’t clear, and she found Dawson not guilty.
After the verdict, Walker said that he believed the officers that night recognized Dawson and did not want to be filmed by her.
“I think her intent was to protect everyone, not to interfere,” he said. “I think she ended up being the one who needed to be protected.”
Dawson’s arrest has not dissuaded her from protesting or being active in the political realm, Walker said.
“She’s going to be a force to be reckoned with,” he said.