Posted on 01/23/2006 2:40:59 PM PST by Sam Hill
Or more accurately, a "pat on the po-po," as an agéd relative used to say.
From the DNC's Associated Press [excerpted]:
Jan 23, 11:26 AM EST
War Protester Sentenced for Trespassing
BINGHAMTON, N.Y. (AP) -- A peace activist was sentenced Monday to six months in prison for splattering his own blood at a military recruiting station to protest the then-looming war in Iraq.
Daniel Burns was the first of four activists to be sentenced this week for splattering their blood onto the windows, walls, pictures and an American flag at the Army and Marine Corps recruiting station on March 17, 2003.
U.S. District Judge Thomas McAvoy said he wasn't punishing Burns for protesting, but for how he protested and what he did.
"The court doesn't question your motivation," he said. "I know you didn't go there with evil purpose in mind. You went in good conscience. But what you did clearly violated the law."
The four were acquitted of the most serious charge - conspiracy to impede an officer of the United States, which carried a maximum sentence of six years in prison.
Trespassing?
And the most serious charge brought was "impeding an officer?"
Maybe Judge McAvoy and the prosecutors should bone up on the US Code and learn some of the other laws that Daniel Burn and his merry band of bravos broke.
Such as the Espionage Act of 1917:
U.S. Espionage Act Of 1917
Title I
Section 3Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall wilfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies and whoever when the United States is at war, shall wilfully cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or shall wilfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or of the United States, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both.
Everyone remembers the Espionage Act of 1917, don't they?
It's the same law that out of control Patrick Fitzgerald is trying to wrap about "Scooter" Libby's neck in his preposterous over-reach to justified getting a salary for the last two years.
So why isn't this law being enforced in a situation for which it was actually written? For which it is tailor made?
Oh, that's right. The judge is a mind-reader. He knew that Burns was acting from the highest motives.
Funny, the Espionage doesn't go into motive. It just says anyone who "willfully obstructs the recruiting or enlistment service." Which is exactly what the self-styled St. Patrick's Day Four were doing. And what they intended to do.
Burns and his America-hating comrades should be facing twenty years rather than six months.
And just in case you ever wondered what an incestuous bunch these people are:
On August 16th, Peter DeMott and Teresa Grady, two of the defendants from the St. Patrick's Four, met with Cindy Sheehan at Camp Casey. They discussed Cindy's mission to meet with President Bush and the upcoming federal court case DeMott and Grady are party to.
Small world, huh?
Ping.
Thanks for the ping; great post! You've nailed it all and in spades.
How does one splatter their own blood? Collect it, etc? Kooks!
Draining your body of blood and then throwing it on someone isn't evil or a questionable motive???
Thanks.
If you haven't, take a gander at the Cornell Review article linked above.
This group sounds like the Manson Family. E.g., they all live together in a commune, etc.
I'd be willing to provide some assistance at the next blood-letting. 00 Buck makes big drain holes...
I did look at the link and it gave me the creeps.
Thank you, Sam Hill, for yet another informative post.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.