Oklahoma County Courthouse Protester Kathy Doyle.

[BBatesokc]

Kathy Jeanette Box-Doyle, 56, is an Oklahoma County resident and her one-woman 'protest' has become a fixture outside the Oklahoma County Courthouse in downtown Oklahoma City, literally daily, since March of this year (2018).

If you've visited the courthouse through the north entrance off of Robert S. Kerr Ave., in the last 6+ months, then you couldn't have avoided seeing her handmade signs that take up almost the entirety of the northwest side of the building from the main entrance to Hudson Ave. (see pic)...



Doyle's efforts have been reported on by the KFOR News Ch4 in May and the Oklahoman in June.

Doyle claims her protest is the result of a feeling that she has yet to receive the justice she deserved after divorcing her former husband Carlton J. Doyle (she actually divorced him twice) - Her most recent divorce was filed in 2012 and 'finalized' in 2014. That said, Kathy Doyle continues to file motions Pro Se - with the most recent being on 8/9/2018.

Most recently Kathy Doyle doesn't even appear to be manning her protest signs for hours at a time. She leaves and simply posts this sign acknowledging she is absent.... The picture below I took this morning (Sunday, Sept. 2, 2018 at 7am)....



She's also setup a semi-permanent 'office' for herself where she stores signs, supplies and creates new signs (see pic)...



I've seen her with a small portable grill, cooking herself lunch and dinner on the sidewalk. I've also received information that she urinates in the parking garage to the north when the publicly accessible buildings in the area are closed.

Anyone who knows me knows that I very much support an individual's right to protest. In fact, I stood in front of that very courthouse, years ago, protesting then Oklahoma County District Attorney Wes Lane. That said, at what point is Kathy Doyle's protest 'going too far'?

For one, her signs make some very disparaging personal remarks about some elected officials that have absolutely nothing to do with her grievance. Most importantly however, her 'protest' has grown in size that it obstructs the use of the common areas outside the courthouse. Her signs block seating areas and many county employees tell me they are fearful of being seen anywhere near the protest signs for fear others will think they support Kathy Doyle's efforts. How large of an area should a single person be allowed to take up/obstruct in their protest? Should she only be allowed signs she can carry or stand next to? Lastly, is she even allowed by law to place her signs in these areas and then leave them unattended? If so, what keeps any citizen from simply lining the courthouse with signs and then walking away and claiming it's a protest that cannot be regulated or restrained.

Thoughts?



ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

1.) Kathy Doyle appears to have a website at this link.
2.) You can get a sense of Kathy Doyle's history with the courts (appellate, Cleveland County, Logan County and Oklahoma County) at this OSCN link.
3.) Kathy Doyle's Facebook profile.

[pw405]

Hmmm... this is rather bizarre. I'm not really sure what I think. Is her "right to protest" even valid if she's away?

[Midtowner]

Hmmm... this is rather bizarre. I'm not really sure what I think. Is her "right to protest" even valid if she's away?

Which leads to a very zen legal question--is it speech if no one is there to speak? I think probably yes, so long as someone is around to hear it. I looked her case up on OSCN and she'd probably be doing fine if she'd just hire a lawyer to fix her situation... and at this point she might have a difficult time finding an Oklahoma County who doesn't recuse, which is fair as she has accused a District Judge of ruling for whoever they are sleeping with. She has an ex who refuses to comply with court orders. Not surprisingly, she's not doing the right things representing herself to get him to pay that money. I think she may have a screw or two loose. I don't think I've seen a family division case not called Hamm v Hamm with so many entries of appearance on it.

From all appearances, she didn't understand that the husband couldn't be jailed for a second time for not following a court order where the amount had already been reduced to judgment and where he'd already been sentenced and served time for. She should have garnished, held hearings on assets, etc., but because she can only try and emulate the things her attorneys did for her when she was represented, she doesn't know that.

[OKCRT]

Which leads to a very zen legal question--is it speech if no one is there to speak? I think probably yes, so long as someone is around to hear it. I looked her case up on OSCN and she'd probably be doing fine if she'd just hire a lawyer to fix her situation... and at this point she might have a difficult time finding an Oklahoma County who doesn't recuse, which is fair as she has accused a District Judge of ruling for whoever they are sleeping with. She has an ex who refuses to comply with court orders. Not surprisingly, she's not doing the right things representing herself to get him to pay that money. I think she may have a screw or two loose. I don't think I've seen a family division case not called Hamm v Hamm with so many entries of appearance on it.

From all appearances, she didn't understand that the husband couldn't be jailed for a second time for not following a court order where the amount had already been reduced to judgment and where he'd already been sentenced and served time for. She should have garnished, held hearings on assets, etc., but because she can only try and emulate the things her attorneys did for her when she was represented, she doesn't know that.

Sounds like she needs help in more ways than one. Some nice Lawyer should give her some legal advice to help her move along.

[Anonymous.]

I have walked by this many times and seen her (sometimes with friends?) cooking food out there at like 8pm or later. I had no idea she had been there since March. The first time I saw the setup was maybe in early July.

[Magic's Immune System]

I saw her unloading her stuff from a new Infinity SUV. Makes it hard to feel sorry for her. She is making wild accusations against judges that have nothing to do with her case. She just wants revenge, and has a screw loose. No wonder her husband left her.

[Midtowner]

Sounds like she needs help in more ways than one. Some nice Lawyer should give her some legal advice to help her move along.

She's accusing judges of corruption and giving rulings in exchange for sexual favors. That's a hard pass for me.

[BBatesokc]

I saw her unloading her stuff from a new Infinity SUV. Makes it hard to feel sorry for her. She is making wild accusations against judges that have nothing to do with her case. She just wants revenge, and has a screw loose. No wonder her husband left her.

In all fairness, that's an older Infinity SUV (from her previous marriage). I believe it's a 2010 or 2011 with a couple of hundred thousand miles on it.

That said, yes, it's easy to see why her husband left her. I personally think we are all bearing witness to an individual's steady decline into insanity.

[Midtowner]

That said, yes, it's easy to see why her husband left her.

I'll take a bit of issue with that statement, having represented so many people in the family courts that I couldn't begin to count them. We don't have much insight into this aside from what you can read on OSCN. I know every single one of the attorneys who have been involved over the years. All are good people. It looks like the husband was supposed to pay alimony and that he didn't do it. He spent months in jail rather than pay alimony. That apparently led to her financial ruin. Does she have an axe to grind? Hell yes she does. I can't blame her for being mad as hell. Could I see a layperson not being advised by counsel coming to the conclusion that the judge won't send ex-hubbie back to jail because he won't pay the alimony as some sort of judicial corruption? I

Reasonable minds can reach that result.

I certainly part ways with her as to her more recent activities.. she needs to be garnishing her ex. He apparently has a decent income. This shouldn't be hard. There are fill in the blank forms online.

[CloudDeckMedia]

The County has been gracious in accommodating her from the north entrance west to Walker and around the corner, but at some point they’ll need to let her know that time’s up.

[Midtowner]

I'm not aware that your 1st Amendment rights came with an expiration date.

[Martin]

i'm not aware that your 1st amendment rights allowed you to indefinitely store your stuff on government property.

[Midtowner]

i'm not aware that your 1st amendment rights allowed you to indefinitely store your stuff on government property.

I don't think the County wants the lawsuit. Placing signs in conspicuous locations on the sidewalk isn't for storage, it's for display. I noticed yesterday and this morning that her signs have been adjusted as to be less obstructive. They're not blocking traffic or any of the seating areas.

[CloudDeckMedia]

I'm not aware that your 1st Amendment rights came with an expiration date.

Mid, she’s absolutely granted that right, but there are limits. Whether the WWI “Bonus Marchers” in the 1930s or “Occupy Wall Street” a few years ago, all were accommodated, but eventually removed without infringing their First Amendment rights.

[CloudDeckMedia]

..

[Martin]

I don't think the County wants the lawsuit.

perhaps so, but if that's the case then i'm confident that the county's reasoning would be based on pragmatism and not constitutionality. granted, i'm basing my position on the assumption that she isn't packing up her signs and other property each night and taking them with her... perhaps you are assuming otherwise.

[d-usa]

I am pro 1st, but it would be reasonable to require her to be present for the protest and to pick up signs left without her there as litter.

[Midtowner]

Mid, she’s absolutely granted that right, but there are limits. Whether the WWI “Bonus Marchers” in the 1930s or “Occupy Wall Street” a few years ago, all were accommodated, but eventually removed without infringing their First Amendment rights.

Let's agree that this isn't either of those things. The WWI Bonus Marchers and Occupy Wall Street protests occupied significant real estate and truly obstructed things. This is a lady and some signs.

[Midtowner]

perhaps so, but if that's the case then i'm confident that the county's reasoning would be based on pragmatism and not constitutionality. granted, i'm basing my position on the assumption that she isn't packing up her signs and other property each night and taking them with her... perhaps you are assuming otherwise.

I'm assuming that if she did leave her property overnight, it would probably end up in the possession of any of our local urban outdoorsmen who might be able to repurpose her property for another use. What makes this problematic for the county is that she is out there personally insulting county officials. Any response by the County could be made to appear to be personal. No matter how well-documented any response was, no matter how well the county personnel covered their butts, no one is going to want to touch this thing because of the potential federal lawsuit and the potential fact that a jury very well could decide that any action taken against her is personal.

[CloudDeckMedia]

Let's agree that this isn't either of those things. The WWI Bonus Marchers and Occupy Wall Street protests occupied significant real estate and truly obstructed things. This is a lady and some signs.

Then we agree there should be limits to the size of the protest. To that I would add the length of time on public property. Government officials don't want to have to write ordinances for people who take advantage of the lack thereof, but if she doesn't leave, it will happen. Her point's been made.

[Magic's Immune System]

In all fairness, that's an older Infinity SUV (from her previous marriage). I believe it's a 2010 or 2011 with a couple of hundred thousand miles on it.

That said, yes, it's easy to see why her husband left her. I personally think we are all bearing witness to an individual's steady decline into insanity.

The one I saw looked much newer than that. How on earth would you know the model of her car and how many miles she has on it?

[Magic's Immune System]

I'll take a bit of issue with that statement, having represented so many people in the family courts that I couldn't begin to count them. We don't have much insight into this aside from what you can read on OSCN. I know every single one of the attorneys who have been involved over the years. All are good people. It looks like the husband was supposed to pay alimony and that he didn't do it. He spent months in jail rather than pay alimony. That apparently led to her financial ruin. Does she have an axe to grind? Hell yes she does. I can't blame her for being mad as hell. Could I see a layperson not being advised by counsel coming to the conclusion that the judge won't send ex-hubbie back to jail because he won't pay the alimony as some sort of judicial corruption? I

Reasonable minds can reach that result.

I certainly part ways with her as to her more recent activities.. she needs to be garnishing her ex. He apparently has a decent income. This shouldn't be hard. There are fill in the blank forms online.

It would also be helpful if she got a job instead of making crazy signs all day.

[BBatesokc]

I'll take a bit of issue with that statement, ....

That’s fine, but I base my opinion on much more than simply putting her name into OSCN. I’ve read the VPO’s, spoken to individuals involved, employees at the courthouse and I’ve even spoken to her briefly twice now. I just really didn’t feel like putting all her personally business in this thread.

Regardless, her way of addressing this is also telling of her mental state IMO.

[Jersey Boss]

Mid, she’s absolutely granted that right, but there are limits. Whether the WWI “Bonus Marchers” in the 1930s or “Occupy Wall Street” a few years ago, all were accommodated, but eventually removed without infringing their First Amendment rights.

...

[Jersey Boss]

It would also be helpful if she got a job instead of making crazy signs all day.

While you question the mileage and age of her car you seem to know that she is employable. How so?