A police officer responding to the scene was shot in the neck by one of the protesters, Benjamin Song, who had brought an AR-15 with a trigger modified for a higher rate of fire.
The defendants said the protest was a peaceful demonstration meant to show solidarity, pointing to the megaphone that one member of the group brought to shout slogans to detainees. Prosecutors pointed to the guns, ballistic vests, and trauma first-aid kits they brought as evidence of malicious intent.
It had little to do with the colour of their clothes and I highly doubt that was something the jury took into deliberation.
It had little to do with the colour of their clothes and I highly doubt that was something the jury took into deliberation.
You are wrong about that:
In a significant victory for the government, jurors convicted eight defendants on material support for terrorism charges for wearing black clothes to the late-night demonstration. That use of “black bloc” clothing was an antifa tactic that assisted in the shooting of the officer, prosecutors said during their closing arguments.
ONE guy was charged and convicted on the weapons charges, but EIGHT defendants were convicted based on their black clothing.
They were also charged with concealing their 'zines. It seems like both the 'zines and the clothing would be strongly protected by the 1st Amendment. This will be appealed all the way to the Supreme Courts. I want to see how they feel about criminalizing particular colors, especially one like black, which SCOTUS likes to wear themselves.
Of course, traditionally, SCOTUS is supposed to be ANTIFA also.
In a significant victory for the government, jurors convicted eight defendants on material support for terrorism charges for wearing black clothes to the late-night demonstration. That use of “black bloc” clothing was an antifa tactic that assisted in the shooting of the officer, prosecutors said during their closing arguments.
It had everything to do with the color of their clothes. Did you even read the article?
Oh. Silly me. I forget it’s fine to shoot fireworks at people and fire rounds off into cops from auto-AR-15s. It was the donned noire; a crime of fashion.
I think it’s not so much about these people. They are the precedent. For future arrests and court cases involving antifa, it’s important for the prosecutor that these guys are put away as antifa. Antifa has a new meaning now, a bit closer to terrorism.
Also, coming as a group, with guns, one person hiding in a bush with an automatic rifle and actually firing, at a cop. In a country that is known for fucked up accomplice liability laws. Not very smart.
It had little to do with the colour of their clothes and I highly doubt that was something the jury took into deliberation.
You are wrong about that:
ONE guy was charged and convicted on the weapons charges, but EIGHT defendants were convicted based on their black clothing.
They were also charged with concealing their 'zines. It seems like both the 'zines and the clothing would be strongly protected by the 1st Amendment. This will be appealed all the way to the Supreme Courts. I want to see how they feel about criminalizing particular colors, especially one like black, which SCOTUS likes to wear themselves.
Of course, traditionally, SCOTUS is supposed to be ANTIFA also.
It had everything to do with the color of their clothes. Did you even read the article?
Yes I did. What do you think I was quoting?
Oh. Silly me. I forget it’s fine to shoot fireworks at people and fire rounds off into cops from auto-AR-15s. It was the donned noire; a crime of fashion.
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
Finally, some good news.
I think it’s not so much about these people. They are the precedent. For future arrests and court cases involving antifa, it’s important for the prosecutor that these guys are put away as antifa. Antifa has a new meaning now, a bit closer to terrorism.
Also, coming as a group, with guns, one person hiding in a bush with an automatic rifle and actually firing, at a cop. In a country that is known for fucked up accomplice liability laws. Not very smart.