Rorie Susan Woods, 55, is not the first woman accused of assault with a deadly weapon but she is certainly among the few to use bees as that weapon. That is what police are alleging after Woods allegedly met them (as they came to enforce an eviction order) with a swarm of angry bees. She was at the scene as an anti-eviction protester.
On Oct. 12, deputies arrived at the home. They reported that Woods arrived later and had several manufactured bee hives hooked up to the back of her SUV. When she then arrived, she began releasing the bees.
As police and neighbors were stung by the angry bees, Woods put on a professional beekeeper suit to protect herself and was reportedly seen carrying what appeared to be a “tower of bees.”
She then moved near the entrance to the residence to obstruct the eviction efforts.
She was eventually arrested and pleaded not guilty to four counts of assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon; three counts of assault by means of a dangerous weapon, and a disorderly conduct charge.
The disorderly conduct charge is obvious. The assault and battery with a dangerous weapon charges are novel. Yet, 100 Americans die each year from bee strings. It is also well within the definition of a dangerous weapon.
Here is the standard jury instruction in Massachusetts for determining if there was a dangerous weapon used in a crime:
To prove the third element, the Commonwealth must prove that the touching was done with a dangerous weapon.
A. If the alleged weapon is inherently dangerous. A dangerous weapon is an item which is designed for the purpose of causing serious injury or death. I instruct you, as a matter of law, that ______________ is a dangerous weapon.
If the alleged weapon is not inherently dangerous. An item that is normally used for innocent purposes can become a dangerous weapon if it is used in a dangerous or potentially dangerous fashion. The law considers an item to be used in a dangerous fashion if it is used in a way that it reasonably appears to be capable of causing serious injury or death to another person.
For example, a brick can be a dangerous weapon if it is thrust against someone’s head or a pillow if it is used to suffocate someone. In deciding whether an item was used as a dangerous weapon, you may consider the circumstances surrounding the alleged crime, the nature, size, and shape of the item, and the manner in which it was handled or controlled.
If a pillow can be a dangerous weapon, thousands of bees are clearly within the definition even without anaphylaxis.
We have some footage of past Bee trials that may give a foreshadowing for this prosecution:
53 thoughts on “Massachusetts Woman Charged with Assault with Dangerous . . . Bees”
Jonathan: …..And there is more bad news for Donald Trump. US District Judge David Carter just ordered that 4 emails between Trump and John Eastman must be turned over to the J.6 Committee because they include evidence of potential crimes–i.e., Trump conspired to defraud the US with false election fraud claims. In the disputed emails Eastman told Trump there was no basis to claim :massive voter fraud”. The problem for Trump is that he signed the court docs claiming voter fraud when he knew that was false. Trump’s reaction to Carter’s ruling was swift: “Please explain to this partisan hack that the President Election of 2020 was Rigged and Stolen”. Classic Trumpster! When confronted with the truth Trump double downs by continuing his lies.
And, then, Gordon Sondland, the former Trump ambassador who testified in Trump’s first impeachment trail, is out with a new book “The Envoy”. In the book Sondland describes the difficulty in working for his boss and says Trump is a “man with a fragile ego” and “to deal with a bully, you have to stand up up to him. To deal with an egomaniac you have to feed that ego”. Sondland says MAGA “sycophants” like Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley and others don’t know how to stand up to Trump. So, for all you similarly included “sycophants” out there on this blog perhaps you could benefit for getting a copy of “The Envoy” for bedtime reading.
Judge Carter has been acting outside the law for a long time.
That he would continue to do so is not surprising.
Communications between Eastman and Trump are Priviledged.
But the norms of the Rule of law do not apply to left wing nuts whenever Trump or increasingly anyone on the right is involved.
The J6 committee has not alleged an actual crime – the core to the entire idiocy of the left and this committee is that discussions of legal and constitutional actions to challegne the fraudulent and lawless 2020 election is somehow a crime. That DESPITE the fact that these actions did NOT take place in 2020, and DID take place in the past and succeeded.
You can not make discussing doing something that was obviously constitutional in the past, into a crime in the present.
Read your own remarks – you can not “conspire” to commit a non-crime. Another point those on the left do not seem to ever be able to grasp.
“Trump conspired to defraud the US with false election fraud claims” If this were a crime – Hillary, Stacy Adam’s Jill Stein, the J6 committtee Chair Thompson and half the democratic party would be in orange jumpsuits right now.
It is not and can not be a crime.
Regardless, you may illegally and unconstitutionally acquire priviledged communications – and I am sure that you will rant and rave because you disagree with what is written – and as we all know disagreeing with left wing nuts is thought crime.
1984 is a WARNING, not a howto manual.
Your rant is deeply flawed – Why isn;t Durham prosecuting Hillary on this ludicrously stupid theory.
Hillary KNEW therw as no evidence of Trump colluding with Russian when she challenged the 2016 election – because SHE manufactured and paid for that claim herself.
Next, you misconstrue actual facts. There is no crime of claiming the election was fraudulent – and you REALLY do not want to try to Put Trump on trial for that – as he will spray the court with lots of credible claims of Fraud for hours. This is also why Trump will never appear before the J6 committee – because you do not want to give him a public forum that will actually be watched by millions of democrats to make his case.
If you do you will have two choices – eitehr an Alex Jones like sham hearing – that will OBVIOUSLY be a kangaroo court that will undermine your credibility, Or Trump actually defending his claims that the election was stolen.
You seem to forget that there were thousands of affadavits of Fraud, there is lots of evidence of fraud, there are convictions for fraud.
Whether you like it or not the claim that there was no fraud in 2020 is ludicrously stupid.
The only question is whether there was sufficient fraud to alter the outcome. You may not like this, but at this time, that is a question of opinion not fact.
“Trump’s reaction to Carter’s ruling was swift: “Please explain to this partisan hack that the President Election of 2020 was Rigged and Stolen”.”
Actually this is the classic proof that Judge Carter is way beyond his skis.
You and Judge Carter seem to be under the delusion that to make a claim in court that you must prove that Claim beyond a reasonable doubt just to file the claim, or you have somehow committed a crime.
That is quite litterally NOT the law. The standard you must meet to file a claim in court is extremely low – and Trump has evidence exceeding that threshold 100,000 times.
Stormy Daniels filed a false claim against Trump – was that a crime ? Is she in Jail ? Many people have filed claims against Trump and lost.
None of them are in Jail.
The claims Micheal Avenattie filed were ludicrously stupid – he did get jail – for stealing his clients money – not for the claims he filed that failed to hold up.
You idiotic standard that if you lose in court, you are a criminal is complete nonsense.
John Say: I don’t know what alt universe you live in but it’s not the one most of us inhabit. You say: “Judge Carter has been acting outside the law for a long time” and “Communications between Eastman and Trump are Privileged”. Really? You really believe such non-sense? If Judge Carter was acting “outside the law” why is he still a presiding judge? Carter ruled the Eastman emails are not privileged. Unless or until Eastman appeals Carter’s order stands! That’s called “acting within the law” What you bizarrely think doesn’t really count in the real world. Even the conservative Supreme Court has refused to intervene on Trump’s behalf. Does this mean the SC is also composed of “left wing nuts”? The logical inconsistency of your claims is truly breathtaking!
live in the actual universe.
Eastman was a Lawyer of Trump’s providing legal advice. His communication’s are priviledged.
That is the default.
You can not subpeona them PERIOD.
Under extremely rare cirsumstances in criminal prosecutions where you can prove that the communications involve actual before the fact law breaking you get them via Warrant.
But you need EVIDENCE of that, in a criminal context and a warrant.
The J6 committee is NOT law enforcement. The entire congress has no law enforcement power.
They can craft criminal laws, but they can not prosecute them or enforce them.
There is no exception to the priviledge of lawyers communicating with clients that applies at all to the J6 committee.
Further congresses powers are related writing legislation and government oversight.
Eastman was not a government employee, and Trump was not acting as president.
There is no government oversight function involved. BTW If Eastman was a government employee, and Trump was acting as president exceutive privilege would apply – the direct communications of presidents and advisors are priviledge too. Indirect communications are sometimes priviledged. But direct ones always are.
Regardless government oversight does not apply.
Congresses power to craft new laws does NOT supercede the 4th amendment or lawyer client priviledge.
Quite simply Judge Carter is off in lala land. He is well outside “the rule of law” and obviously so.
John, Dennis lives in the real world on Planet Earth. He is part of society, the part that talks without knowing what they talk about. Perhaps one can argue with what you say by providing opinions based on law or history, but Dennis cannot. He can only argue based on his feelings. That is the extent of his abilities where these discussions are concerned. This is not an insult to Dennis as a person. I am sure he is decent and hardworking, or at least was in the past. He just never learned that feelings aren’t enough. One needs knowledge and experience along with critical thinking skills.
Eastman’s communications to Trump even as alleged by the J6 committee are Eastman’s opinions regarding the legal meaning of the constitution.
I would be hard pressed to think of anything that would be more obviously priviledged.
“If Judge Carter was acting “outside the law” why is he still a presiding judge?”
Because federal judges have lifetime tenure and can only be removed by impeachment by congress.
“Carter ruled the Eastman emails are not privileged.”
Blatantly obvious fundimental legal error.
i.e. the rule of man, not law.
If Eastman were the lawyer for a Mafia Don describing in detail how to avoid prosecution for a crime the Don had already committed – that exchange would be priviledged.
If Eastman was the lawyer for a Mafia Don describing to that Don BEFORE the fact how to accomplish what he wanted without breaking the law – that exchange would be priviledged.
If Eastman was the lawyer for a Mafia Don – even if he was describing how to break the law with the least likelyhood of getting caught – the exchange could not be subpeoned by congress – thoug with PROOF of a crime and a high probability that the crime fraud exception would apply DOJ could get the exchange with a Warrant. But NOT CONGRESS.
Congress is not law enforcement.
“Unless or until Eastman appeals Carter’s order stands! That’s called “acting within the law””
Absolutely stupidly false.
If a judge orders you to shoot your neighbor, that is not acting within the law – whether you appeal or not.
That was a ludicrously stupid argument on your part.
“What you bizarrely think doesn’t really count in the real world.”
HUndreds of years of legal precdent are what defines the rule of law.
“Even the conservative Supreme Court has refused to intervene on Trump’s behalf. Does this mean the SC is also composed of “left wing nuts”?”
SCOTUS is not obligated to intervene EVER. The NORM is they allow lawless decisions of lower courts to stand – simply because they can not hear even a small portion of cases brought before them.
Further in many cases – like most of the cases Trump has brought to the Supreme court so far, the case is likely to end up back at the supreme court later if the lawlessness of the lower courts continues.
Thus far SCOTUS has not decided to bitch slap the 11th cir ct of appeals – thought they richly deserve it.
In all likelyhood they NEVER will end up doing so – because the case will fizzle and die like every single attempt to “get Trump” has so far.
In the unlikely event DOJ indicts, has illegally seized material allowed into court, convicts, Trump loses at the appelate level, THEN SCOTUS may choose to intervene – or not.
Regardless, you can NEVER conclude that any lower court decision is lawful or constitutional just because SCOTUS declined to hear it.
Nor can you conclude that it was not a miscarriage of justice.
There is no right to be heard by the supreme court and no right to a remedy from them no matter how lawless the outcome might be.
“The logical inconsistency of your claims is truly breathtaking!”
It is not “my claim” it is quite literally THE LAW. In this instance logic has nothing to do with it.
The exchanges are priviledged and there is not an exception to priviledge that even applies to the J6 comittee.
What Sondland did NOT say was that Trump demanding a quid pro quo from Zelenski.
That is all that mattered.
You can also listen to Bari Weis’s interview of Bill Barr on her Honestly Podcast.
It is excellent – and will amplify your complaints about Trump.
Except that Barr actually massively contradicts himself.
First he states that Trump’s personality and management style made accomplishing things difficult to impossible.
Then he goes on to state that the accomplishments of Trump’s presidency are spectacular.
Both can not be true concurrently.
As I have noted repeatedly – I am not a Trump fan. I did not vote for him.
In alot of ways I share Sondland’s and Barr’s views regarding Trump.
But with one important difference:
GHWB was a decent person – he accomplished almost nothing as president.
GWB was a decent person – he accomplished almost nothing as president.
McCain, Romney, Rubio, Jeb Bush, Kaisich, ….. these are the republican persona’s that purportedly should be leading the GOP.
Yet, none of them have accomplished anything. They either can not get the GOP nomination or they can not win.
Even on the democratic side – Obama certainly was well spoken – as president he accomplished almost nothing.
The people who got elected did NOT honor their campaign promises – not democrats, not Republicans.
Nor did they accomplish much of anything else of any consequence.
Whether Trump was a ”
bad manager” a”difficult person” with a “fragile ego”.
Trump accomplished an enormous amount.
Not everything he promised – but far more than either Bush, or Obama, and he did so in only 4 years with the left, democrats, the media, significant parts of the GOP, the FBI/DOJ and much of the administration trying to thwart him and a Special counsel investigating him.
I recall claims that just getting a SC apointed was the end of the Trump presidency – because presidents can not accomplish much while SC’s investigate.
Well Bad manager, fragile ego, ranting and raving Trump
Had the strongest economy of any president in the 21st century
Very low inflation.
Reduced US military conflict globally.
Brought Asia together to contain China.
Brought Europe together to contain Putin.
Reduced illegal border crossings dramatically.
Built alot of the wall he promised.
Made the US temporarily energy independent.
Negotiated the first peace deal in the mideast in 40 years, and the largest ever.
Tanked the idiotic Iran deal – look where Biden is now ? He can not figure out what to do about a stupid deal – that the iranian people do not want, that supports a regime that is murdering its own people, that is not an ally, and that is pissing off our allies.
And that is just part of Trump’s accomplishments.
In 2024 it appears voters will get the chance, hopefully this time more honestly to decide if they want a president that no one likes his style, but that accomplishes things. Or a demented geriatric whos accomplishments are nearly all BAD.
“accomplishing things difficult to impossible”
Sometimes that’s a good thing. Maybe what some people wanted to get accomplished were actually going to be detrimental and he got in the way of other people’s agendas.
Wait how did the landlord have standing to evict? Oh the landlord had standing ….because an overstay is tresspass?? Last I looked oregon gives people free rent! Our tenants haven’t paid for four months…..on June 30th they were waiting for even more concovid is shennigans $…And Oregon made it illegal to give kick out notice. Until Sept 30. Meanwhile the feds want estimated taxes….seriously?
African-American bees are notoriously aggressive. Bee Lives Matter (BLM)
Once again, far Left activists assault police.
Notice the trend.
No worries. The Leftists are going to collectively blow their heads with Dr Joseph Lapado’s eyeopening WSJ piece this evening. Just in time for the midterm election. October. Surprise! Brilliant timing
Covid Boosters Aren’t for Everyone
“For young men, the risks outweigh the benefits at this point.”
By Joseph A. Ladapo
How safe are the Covid-19 vaccines? Under my leadership, the Florida Department of Health analyzed overall mortality and cardiac-related mortality risk associated with Covid-19 vaccination. We found an 84% increase in the relative incidence of cardiac-related death among men 18 to 39 within 28 days following mRNA vaccination.
The left has smeared these results as “anti-science,” as Holden Thorpe, the editor of Science, recently stated in an editorial. But time and again, the unorthodox science related to Covid-19 becomes the mainstream. Scientists have been attacked for questioning the efficacy of lockdowns, for urging schools to reopen, for challenging the effectiveness of mask mandates, and for opposing vaccine mandates and passports. The scientists asking these questions had the data on their side, but critics bowed to fear and political ideology.
It’s happening again. The increased risk of cardiovascular events following the Covid-19 vaccine isn’t news; it has been known for over a year.
Backed by the data, I stand by my recommendation against Covid-19 mRNA vaccination for young men. At this point in the pandemic, it is unlikely that the benefits outweigh these risks. The public can be assured that I will continue to lead with data, and I will place their interests ahead of political pressure and fear-based ideologies.
Let the explosions begin
Watch The Real Anthony Fauci Movie for Free!
Oct 19, 2022
The Alex Jones Show
The Alex Jones Show
‘Real Anthony Fauci’ Filmmakers Jeff Hays and Tony Lyons join The Alex Jones Show to break down the truth of the collusion of Big Tech, Big Pharma and Big Govt in their new movie.
(The interview, 42:00 min)
(This is Hays/Lyons movie. People can pay it or watch it 1st & decide if they wish to pay for it. You’ve about a week for the free Prom.)
See it for free for a limited time here: https://therealanthonyfaucimovie.com/
I’ll post this again.
Not paying rent is a form of theft. It’s stealing the use of a residence without paying for it.
Sometimes, people have very good reasons for not paying rent. People are getting squeezed from all sides right now with high gas prices, high taxes, high costs of doing business which increases the cost of all goods and services. Plenty of people have been knocked right off their feet.
Then there are those who buy drugs, alcohol, jewelry, clothes, and blow their money, with nothing left over for rent.
There are those who took advantage of the rent moratorium, buying boats and cars, while not paying rent.
That rent moratorium seriously harmed rental owners. They had to pay property taxes, utilities, and upkeep. If the property was mortgaged, they still had to make mortgage payments. The federal government decided their renters just didn’t have to pay them for long months, without having to prove they were in financial distress. Instead of giving renters the payments, the government simply left rental owners with all the bills.
This incentivized property owners to sell off rental properties, and discouraged investors from buying rentals. This tightened the rental market. The lower inventory, combined with the higher risk of losses due to rent moratoriums, meant that rent was driven up. Rising mortgage interest rates also drive rent up.
After the rent moratorium lifted, rental owners were in a hurry to evict renters who hadn’t paid them, in order to either get in renters who would, or sell off the property.
Some activists behave as if it’s immoral to make a living, or any profit at all, off of rental property. They feel entitled to live in properties for free. They seem to understand that government housing, like The Projects, tends to be run down, dangerous, full of addicts, and it’s very difficult to sue the government for being a slumlord. Yet, they don’t want private property owners to make a dime off of rentals.
We should be encouraging more people to invest in rentals, not discouraging it. That would increase inventory, and drive down rent. Empty nesters move into smaller properties, and rent out the larger home to fund their retirement. People save up for a downpayment on houses at auction, fix them up, rent them out, and that pays for the mortgage, giving them an asset they’re slowly paying off. Some people make rental investments a career. If the rental market collapses, and if activists have their way, making it impossible to get non payers out, then all that will be left is government housing. The Projects.
No one thrives living on government assistance. Ask the Native Americans on reservations without Gambling contracts.
The DoJ just told congress that it needs $34 million more for the Jan. 6th witch hunt. Man do these people fear Donald Trump.
Jonathan: Speaking of bee stings. John Durham got “stung” badly this week. Two trials and no convictions. What you and Trump claimed would prove the “crime of the century” and put Dem higher ups and even Hillary Clinton behind bars proved to be a cheap empty suit–a balloon full of conspiracy theories that burst when struck by the truth! Now if I were AG Garland I would call Durham into his office and say: “John, it’s time to submit your report and go home”. But one thing is certain. If the GOP regains control of Congress they will try to revive the investigation. There will be calls for new hearings. Durham will be called to testify and lay out all the things he could not prove in a court of law. Poor ole John. I’m sure he is having second thoughts about accepting Bill Barr’s appointment. And you should also have second thoughts about your role in promoting the so-called “crime of the century”. But I don’t expect you will be writing an obit column about John Durham’s 3 year failed investigation. That would be a too painful exercise.
Durham did the job he was tasked with to perfection. It’s just not how you understand what that job was. He was tasked with accomplishing nothing, and to take a long time doing it. He will be rewarded.
Americans now largely see the Biden’s DOJ and FBI as Nazi Gestapos. Durham was wildly successful.
I have my problems with Durham’s strategy.
I do not expect that he is now going to turn his sights to the DOJ/FBI/SC – despite the fact that two courts have just concluded the DOJ/FBI were conducting a knowingly unconstitutional criminal investigation.
But Durham has done far more than Horrowitz to destroy the very foundation of the Collusion delusion.
There is at this point no doubt at all that the DOJ/FBI conducted a criminal investigation that was illegal and unconstitutional from day one.
That means EVERYTHING – every FISA warant affadavit, Every subpeona. Every step taken by Mueller, much of the testimony to the House and Senate was all FALSE – Criminal.
It also means that significant part of DOJ/FBI are politically corrupt.
Thse two trials results in Jury findings of FACT that the Steele Dossier and the Alpha Bank scam were not merely HOAX’s,
But that the FBI KNEW THAT FROM THE START.
That is the specific basis by which the Jury found Sussman and Danchenko innocent.
It was also the core to their defense.
You do not see how damaging that is.
If the Steele Dossier and Alpha Bank Scam were know to be false at the time the FBI received them, then Crossfire Huricant is an illegal and unconstitutional investigation, and a criminal violation of the civil rights of those being investigated.
It also means that the FIRST afadavit to the FISA court was perjured – not just by Klinesmith but by ALL involved.
It means that significant portions of testimony to the House and Senate were perjured.
It means that every single warrant and subpeona issued using either was perjured.
It means that Rosensteins appointment of Mueller was lawless and unconstitutional.
You do not seem to grasp that Durham’s losses prove the criminality of the entire Collusion Delusion.
I do not know what Durham will do.
It is clear he can not get a conviction from a DC jury.
It is also likely the statute of limitations on the crimes committed by FBI/DOJ/SC have passed or will shortly.
But whether you like it or not, the actual Jury verdicts you celebrate are damning – not of Durham – but of all your hero’s in the FBI/DOJ/SC
Danchenko and Sussman can not be innocent, unless those int he FBI/DOJ are guilty.
The FBI/DOJ/SC conducted an unconstitutional criminal investigation. There is nothing in the Steele Dossier or Alpha Bank scam that alleges a possible crime that is not now as a matter of court record FALSE.
Either Danchenko and Sussman are criminally responsible for the violation of civil and constitutional rights of everyone investigated.
Or those in the FBI/DOJ/SC are.
The courts have found Deanchenko and Sussamn are not criminally responsible.
Therefore the SC/FBI/DOJ are.
“What you and Trump claimed would prove the ‘crime of the century’ . . .”
Which, in fact, Durham did do by unearthing the mechanics and miscreants behind the Russia hoax — including the fact that the (politicized) FBI put a $1 million bounty on Trump’s head.
But when you’re a Leftist, whose MO is rewriting reality, the J6 kangaroo court is a daily “bombshell,” and the machinations to topple a president are a nothing-burger.
One of the most amazing things since the Election of Trump has been the complete and total failure of Democrats at what they have in the past universally been better at – Messaging.
Republicans have a real problem with J6 – people are not happy with the fact that a protest at the capital turned violent, and the burden of proof is on republicans to prove they were not responsible.
I think that burdern is easily met – protestors first amendment rights were violated. Locking down the capital was a constitutional violation.
But the lefts control of media makes getting that message out broadly difficult.
Conversely the Democrats efforts to make J6 larger have failed. Ordinary americans know what an insurection is and that was not one.
They are also not that driven by “insurection” rhetoric. We saw massive protests and some violence in Hong Kong in 2019. And Americans supported the protestors. We are seeing violence in Iran right now – even though the left is hiding it from us. And Americans are with the protestors.
Event he BLM riots of the summer – most of us support the right of those involved to protest – even if we are not aligned with their politics. They lose our support when protesting devolves to looting and arson and violations of private property rights.
We understand Dobbs protestors battering the doors of the Supreme Court. We do not support them at the home of Justices.
We do not support people firebombing abortion clinics, or pro-life clinics.
We do support people protesting in front of either. Most of us regardless of our views on Abortion.
Regardless, the left has gone nuts. They have lost their advantage on messaging.
They have lost their connection to the common sense of ordinary people.
Most americans understand that what happened with the Collusion delusion was VERY VERY WRONG.
They may not completely grasp specifically who is criminally culpable – but they know that serious crimes were committed.
And they know that all or part of DOJ/FBI was politicized and can not be trusted.
Durham has taken flack from the left and the right – and some of that is justified – SOMEONE should have gone to jail for this.
Most Americans understand that the Collusion Delusion is FAR more consequential than Tresspassing at the capital, or a sitin at an abortion clinic.
Most american’s understand that the Danchenko and Sussman defense was “Yes, We lied, but the FBI knew we were lying so it is not a crime”
In BOTH trials the accused was openly admitting – even pushing the fact that the Steele Dossier was lies and gossip and everyone knew it.