We have previously discussed my reservations about the use of federal charges of arson and other crimes to prosecute individuals accused of rioting offenses in the recent protests. The concern was the federalization of local offenses. Now, however, I have concerns about state charges out of Oklahoma. Teenagers are facing terrorism charges after allegedly helping to break in the windows of an Oklahoma City bail bonds business in late May. I have long raised concerns about the broadening of terrorism laws and this is an example of why I still hold such concerns. As the Justice Department explores possible terrorism charges, the Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater appears to be adopting an exceptionally broad interpretation of that crime. Among those charged was Malachai Davis, 18, who was shown breaking the window of the CJ Bail Bond building using what appeared to be brass knuckles. That charge has a tragic irony because, according to his attorney, Davis’ father died in the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in 2001.
Haley Lin Crawford and Sydney Lunch, who both just turned 18, were charged with acting with a large crowd to unlawfully break the windows of CJ’s Bail Bonds in Oklahoma City on May 30, according to the Oklahoman. They were identified using Facebook Live video streamed by other demonstrators as well as the Crimestoppers bulletin below.
At least three others had been charged with terrorism after the May 30 incident.
Prater declared last month that those who incite violence in the streets are “criminals” and “[w]hen you employ these tactics for a political purpose, you are a terrorist.” He denounced Black Lives Matter protestors of later trying to intimidate him and law enforcement to drop the charges. Protesters held a sit in at his office.
I tend to agree with the Black Lives Matter position, contained in a petition on Change.org, that it is overreach “[t]o conflate acts of vandalism against property with acts of terrorist violence against human beings.” The Oklahoma Democratic Party has also spoken out against the charges.
By charging such property damage as terrorism, the prosecutor radically increased the potential sentence as well as the required bond.
What is curious is that others were charged with rioting (and at least one with assault on an officer) but Prater charged these individuals with terrorism. I do not see the dividing line between the cases.
Two other cases come closer to the cases we discussed earlier as possible federal terrorism cases linked to the burning of police vehicles.
Isael Antonio Ortiz, 21, is accused of burning an Oklahoma County sheriff’s van and attempting to burn a bail bonds business with others. Eric Christopher Ruffin, 26, was accused of encouraging the “wanton destruction” on Facebook Live. He is quoted from the Facebook video as saying every single one of those that kill Black people need to die and “that’s what happens when you got numbers outside.”
This is Ruffin’s second charge. He was accused on May 30th of terrorism in relation to the burning of the van. He was then charged in the bail bonds fire. He went on Facebook Live before turning himself in to declare
“I’m innocent. You dig what I’m saying?We’ve got mounds and mounds of evidence. I didn’t burn nothing. I didn’t set nothing on fire. I didn’t tell nobody to do none of that s—. You dig what I’m saying? And … they’re doing this because, I feel as if … they want a fall person right now. … And it’s wrong. It’s wrong what they’re trying to do to me.”
He was also featured in this interview:
Ruffin’s threat (if tied to criminal acts) comes closest to conventional terrorism charge. I still have some reservations, particularly with the Ortiz case, in treating wanton destruction as terrorism. We have seen thousands of such cases during protests and they have not been treated as terroristic acts. I believe that such charges would be reserved for the narrow category of criminals who use violent to terrorize communities or countries. Ruffin admittedly raises a viable issue, but we need to know more about the context and intent behind that statement. I am still concerned about the use of the charge even with Ruffin even with his reckless and threatening words.
There are very serious charges that can be brought against all of these defendants, including the rioting charges levied against at least six other individuals. I do not see why it is necessary to treat this as terrorism. Terrorism is an offense that is quickly loosening its meaning and cohesion as a criminal charge as prosecutors reframe vandalism, property damage, and rioting as terrorism. It seems as misplaced as calling the 9/11 attacks as a property damage offense. The damage in Oklahoma was done in the rage of a protests following the death of George Floyd. That is no defense but the intent was not to terrorize. If it could be construed as terroristic, then any wanton property damage would become terrorism.
As I have said before, I tend to view these cases through the eyes of criminal defense attorney. However, I cannot see the logic and necessity of framing these crimes as terroristic acts.
There is a long history of over and under charging suspects often driven by political considerations. Terrorism is such a nebulous term that it is ideally suited to over charging and over reacting to all kinds of events. There was a time when the dimwit who broke the windows would have been given the opportunity to help fix the windows and pay for the materials. Strange world we are living in these days.
There is no limit to supporting terrorism or committing acts of terrorism. Pelosi illegally seating The Squat qualifies.
JT:
“Now, however, I have concerns about state charges out of Oklahoma. Teenagers are facing terrorism charges after allegedly helping to break in the windows of an Oklahoma City bail bonds business in late May. I have long raised concerns about the broadening of terrorism laws and this is an example of why I still hold such concerns.”
*****************************
Don’t be concerned and this isn’t broadening. Their actions meet the legal definition of terrorism under federal and state law:
FEDERAL:
18 U.S. Code § 2331(5):
(the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
(A)involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B)appear to be intended—
(i)to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii)to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii)to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C)occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States;
OKLAHOMA:
Under the Oklahoma Antiterrorism Act, “’terrorism’ is any act of violence that results in personal injury or damage to property and that is perpetrated as a means to incite violence or fear or to coerce a civilian population or government to cede to demands.”
Definitions are always helpful since in criminal charges under the Federal statute, the “acts dangerous to human life” were shattering glass which is dangerous to their own lifes and other users of the bail bonding shop and users of the sidewalk since presumably glass is sharp. Oklahoma law only requires “personal injury or damage to property.” We got that in spades.
As Oklahoma authorities clearly explained “this isn’t Seattle.”
mespo – if you are old enough to vote, you are old enough to be tried for terrorism.
It’s striking to me that this 18-year-old lost his father in the WTC attack, and yet has turned out to be a rioter and destroyer of businesses now. What made him take this path? It’s so different from those who’ve enlisted in the military and have become more patriotic. What indoctrination was he fed by his mother and education system?
Although 18 is technically still a teenager, isn’t that the age of adulthood for pressing charges?
What is rioting if not domestic terrorism? Do you think the St. Louis couple brandishing weapons were being terrorized? A violent mob coming at a person seems like it would invoke a feeling of terror. There is no room for this behavior in a civilized society. Responsibility number one for government is the safety of its citizens. If the government refuses to provide the safety, we have the natural right to defend ourselves. And when this happens, the government abdicates its primary responsibility, there is only one sentence for the rioter who threatens a person. I am just surprised it has not happened yet. Unless the government wants us to slide into a civil war, it needs to take action. It will not end well for the Leftists if they continue to escalate. Either the cops will shut them down or they will overstep their boundaries and receive the ultimate sentence.
We will all go out to meet em when they come!
I’ll be driving six white horses… And shooting at their torses!
We will all go out to meet em when they come.
Charging these dopey kids as terrorists will probably turn out like all these domestic surveillance programs. Conservatives loved them because they couldn’t imagine they would be used against white guys with names like Carter or George… until they were. If these kids are understood to be part of a domestic terror cell, then their friends and entire families are fair targets for surveillance, searches, undercover operations and who knows what else. Do you associate with someone who has a confederate flag tattoo? Maybe President Biden will send the FBI to confirm whether or not you are also a domestic terrorist.
Then civil libertarians like Turley can wag their fingers and say, “I told you so.”
Brad, don’t you know, the FBI has been liasing with “jttf”s — joint terror task forces– at surveilling and charging ALLEGED white racists with hopped up crimes, sometimes on weak evidence, for decades now.
it started in earnest with “OPERATION PATCON” which also gave us Waco and Ruby Ridge. look it up. maybe before your time
So it’s about time the tools of the state were used on those other factions trying to destroy America from within, ie, the anarchists
Can’t they be charged with Campaign Violations? After all, this is the Democrat Campaign we are watching..They are running on the “OR ELSE” platform. Also known as “You want some of this?”
cunaeus – you might be able to make the case for Election Interference.
“All enemies, foreign or domestic”. That works for me at this point.
If one person at a time of local peace goes out and breaks a window in a building or damages private property, I would agree that is only vandalism.
But when there are riots going on across the country by thousands or people and they are explicitly political, with the aim to intimidate not only law enforcement but the general public, how in the world can you claim it is not terrorism?
I would suggest you ask those living in those neighborhoods if they feel terrorized.
” I cannot see the logic and necessity of framing these crimes as terroristic acts.”
The acts were a crime. It is up to the prosecutor to figure out what the charge should be should they go to trial. I’m hesitant about placing 18 year old first time offenders in jail so a lot has to do with the individual involved. A second or third time offender is quite different.
I’m hesitant about the charge or terrorism but we know little of the facts so for the present until charges are ready for the jury I think it is too early to draw a solid conclusion. This is where pleas can become very valuable as a “good” kid could plead and potentially get what ever charge is finally placed expunged from his record.
Nope. Prosecutorial discretion should be exercised for one reason only: to ration staff time in accordance with priorities. The severity of offenses as delineated in the penal code should guide you as to setting priorities.
In a sensibly composed penal code, there are formulae which define enhancements for recidivist offenders and dispensations for offenders under 25. With these deployed, plea agreements would include a fudge factor between 0.5 and 1.0 which would regulate the precise duration of the sentence, subject to parole reviews. Nearly all crimes should result in incarceration or corporal punishment. If he’s not in jail, he should be in the pillory or he should be smacked with a rattan cane.
No more social work in the world of criminal justice.
I agree, corporal punishment should be imposed to reduce jail population and provide with more effective punishments
there should be modest and traditional methods of such punishment perscribed by law, only imposed after due process trials, and in a way that is not permanently physically injurious. such as caning is done in Singapore
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caning_in_Singapore
Singapore is an orderly and prosperous society and one of the most favorable residencies in the world. Perhaps caning is worth a look?
I should think caning for DUI would be less harmful to society– AND THE OFFENDER– then lengthy incarceration. and more of a memorable deterrent!
WGAF? More “riot” porn for JT’s alt right fan base.
Bythebook,
So you’re not concerned about the expanded definition of terrorism?
you can never negotiate with a terrorist especially those from the Swamp
Start your own blog, you graceless slug.
“That is no defense but the intent was not to terrorize.”
Of course that was the “intent”, Jonathan.
You obviously have zero street sense.
REGARDING ABOVE:
Rhodes is also Gray Anonymous
Came em.
Agreed with the over reach tendencies on terrorism charges, Turley. How can it be surprising at all the Trump administration (w/ Barr leading the charge) to see this over reach institutionalized into standard practice though? We’re taking broad steps into Orwell territory with these clowns.
I’m hoping you get Barr’s ear with this blog post.
You live in Orwell territory 24/7, Bugs.
In fact, you’d make a perfect Mr. Charrington, if you had his intelligence.
Charrington, ay? Seems I’m making you think, Rhodes.
You’re welcome.
Throw the book at them. Its time to Shut this down and punish those cause damage and etc. and find their financial backers and leaders and punish them to.
Really? Who do you believe to be the “financial backers” of these individuals?
George Soros, Bill Gates, the Liberal Medial, and the Hollywood Elite. Do you not speak-right-wing-nut-ish?
Oh Hillary, dearest, why the hate? You know that we are all Americans and we are all in this together.
C’mon, Hitlery, stop with the dividing of Americans and pitting one against the other. It’s not like any of us have rifles, guns, shotguns, molotov cocktails, dox people whom we dislike, expose their families and loved ones to arson, threats and demand their termination of employment and…..
oh wait…..
Soros is small potatoes, Molly. He’s just the front man for much deeper pockets.
You know nothing worth knowing, and your ignorance is exacerbated by your severe late stage TDS.
Soros has very deep pockets. He also has an earned reputation as a destroyer of nations. Many times over going back decades, with his engineered color revolutions. Now he seeks to abuse his adopted nation, America, until it adjusts itself to his liking.
from a CNBC report about Soros statements to the World Economic Forum in January 2020:
“His new super PAC, the Democracy PAC, was involved with funding several Democratic candidates during the recent Virginia state elections. Democrats went on to take control of the Virginia Legislature for the first time in more than two decades.
Records show that the PAC has raised just over $5 million and has that amount on hand.
Soros has been one of the top Democratic donors. During the 2016 presidential election, he spent more than $20 million on Democrats, including at least $8 million on a pro-Hillary Clinton super PAC, Priorities USA Action, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
Soros is ranked second among all political donors in the 2020 election cycle, with over $6 million in contributions. Just ahead of him is billionaire and presidential candidate Tom Steyer, who has contributed just more than $23 million.”
……….AND WE ALSO KNOW HE FUNDS BLM
How can you nut understand? It is politics. Charging common vandals with terrorism fits into the narrative that Trump is trying to create that all the protesters are out to destroy the US.
I’m sorry, were you saying “Move along, nothing to see here”?
Trump doesn’t need to “create” that “narrative”, Molly.
You’re confusing protesters with the rioters and insurrectionists in Antifa, who are using BLM sponsored protests as their tool to start riots.
The self-proclaimed Marxist founders of BLM have the same agenda as Antifa. It has all been very well coordinated.
So they are both guilty of using the earnest protesters to further an agenda that has nothing to do with black lives, or the well being of black people in the US. That is clearly evidenced by the defund the police, BS. Which is terrifying to black people living in high crime areas, who want more Police, not less Police.
Therefore the earnest protesters are what is known as a “useful idiots”.
Calm down. Take your meds. You are over-reacting and unglued. For the love of country and patriots, this will all change in the next few months before November.
Patriots are in control and our nation is in good hands. Did you get your supply of ammo yet?
We should all join Oathkeepers. Most all of us took the oath.
Since we found the body in the Pawn Shop (which is not a bakery) and we know the terrorists in Portland and nightly attacking and trying to set fire to the Federal Courthouse there, and attacking the Federal officers inside and out, I have to saw the terrorism charges legitimate. Of course, they are innocent until proven guilty, so they will certainly get their day is court.
Make the defendant clean outhouses.