Biography
Daniel Sicken is described as an anti-nuclear activist whose direct action centered on U.S. intercontinental ballistic missile infrastructure. In August 1998, he and a co-defendant entered a missile-site area in Colorado as a symbolic act of “disarmament,” using tools and blood imagery to protest the existence and planned use of nuclear weapons. They remained on site and were arrested, treating detention as an expected outcome of the action.
Federal prosecutors pursued serious felony charges that framed the protest as sabotage and destruction of government property. Sicken was convicted and sentenced to a multi-year federal prison term, with the case later discussed in legal and policy debates about how broadly “sabotage” statutes can be applied to nonviolent protest actions at military facilities. On August 6, 1998 (Hiroshima Day), Daniel Sicken and Oliver Sachio Coe entered a Minuteman III missile site in Weld County, Colorado, and damaged its components as the Minuteman III Plowshares action. They were prosecuted in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado.
The Winter 1998–99 Nukewatch Pathfinder reports that Daniel Sicken and Sachio Ko-Yin (Oliver Sachio Coe) were convicted following a Denver trial beginning November 2, 1998 over their August Minuteman III Plowshares action in Colorado. It explicitly states that they were jailed before sentencing. January 20 was the announced sentencing date, and the possible more-than-twenty-year punishment was exposure, not time actually served. Source: https://www.laka.org/docu/magazines/nukewatch_pathfinder/1998-4-winter.pdf#page=5
Additional original custody evidence
The GTE Strategic Systems update states Dan Sicken was actually released October 24, 1985. The same issue’s released-prisoner directory expands his name to Daniel Sicken. This directly bridges the existing individual rather than relying on a similar name. Admission and total served time remain unprinted; this Massachusetts episode is distinct from the 1998 Colorado case.
The Nuclear Resister No.35, October 24, 1985: PDF page 4; PDF page 7.
The GTE account individually identifies this defendant in the April 5, 1985 arrest. All eight refused a promise to remain off GTE property and were held on $1,000 bond until April 11 conviction and time-served sentencing, with seven credited days. This is actual multi-day imprisonment distinct from the August 1985 GTE action. Seven credited days are not equated with six elapsed calendar days; physical release on April 11 is not explicitly reported and remains blank. The source’s Claire/Daniel Lawrence spellings are bridged to the existing distinctive GTE community identities; Daniel Either remains separately held for spelling verification.
The original individually names this defendant among nine arrested August 9, 1985 at GTE and tried that afternoon. It expressly reports refusal of the fines, conversion to jail days, and four still in jail, identifying these four by current jail addresses. This establishes actual August 9 intake. Independently corroborated later physical releases remain unchanged; the source’s advertised October/September release dates alone are not used. Any previously documented thirty-nine-day credit is retained as a reported counting convention rather than replaced with a conflicting elapsed-day calculation.
The May 1999 Friends Journal report retrospectively records the February 18,1999 sentencing hearing for the August 6,1998 Colorado missile-silo action. It gives Daniel Sicken forty-one months and Sachio Ko-yin thirty months. John LaForge’s contemporary Nukewatch article names Ko-yin in the narrative and Oliver Sachio Coe with register 28361-013 in its mailing line, independently bridging that identity; the Tenth Circuit opinion names Daniel Harris Sicken and Oliver Sachio Coe, also known as Oliver Hydon, and confirms the respective 41/30 month concurrent sentences. The winter newsletter’s January 20 hearing was a future schedule, while March 5/9 are written judgment-entry dates. Neither replaces the actual February18 hearing. These are imposed sentences, not completed time served. Existing duplicate rows and their conflicting custody endpoints are retained for reconciliation; no intake is inferred from sentencing and no overlapping rows are summed as consecutive imprisonment.
