Posted on 07/21/2026 9:59:55 AM PDT by Morgana
A white woman has gone on trial over claims she racially abused an autistic black boy in a playground after a spat over applesauce.
Shiloh Hendrix, 37, was filmed allegedly calling a young black boy the 'N-word' at a park in Rochester, Minnesota, last April.
Video of the exchange went viral and Hendrix was charged with three counts of disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor charge with a maximum of 90 days in jail.
Hendrix, who has pleaded not guilty, appeared on Monday in Olmsted County District Court as jury selection got underway for her trial.
The jury will decide whether her behavior was unlawful and likely to cause violence, or if her words are protected under the First Amendment.
According to KTTC, Hendrix's lawyer Brian Karalus raised concerns that he did not have a list of witnesses that the state intended to call during trial.
Prosecutors said they would not release their witness list due to safety concerns, they also said that Karalus knew this and had made no prior objections, the outlet said.
KAALTV reported that right wing activist Jake Lang was in court as proceedings got underway, while protestors outside held sings calling for Hendrix to be freed.
Jury selection is expected to continue today which will be followed by opening statements.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
“You’re nagging me,don’t be a nagger.”
Autistic, huh?
She should have called him the R word.
First Amendment. The charges are unconstitutional.
Autistic is the new excuse for lazy parenting. “He was stealing from your diaper bag, oh he’s autistic!”.
“...will not release witness list due to safety concerns”. Now why would there be safety concerns? How in the hell does this even get to trial?!
True. But I’d probably still find her guilty for being stupid. She couldn’t think of another word after all these decades?
Notably absent from the article is that the kid, and obviously his father, are Somali. We all know that 117% of all Somali kids in Minnesota are autistic, requiring expensive government services
This story is international news? Would the Daily Mail cover this story if the races were reversed? Do they cover far worse crimes committed by blacks against whites?
For political reasons. See my No. 9
What "N" word? Neighbor? Nutcase? Nerd? Naughty? Neanderthal?
No?
Oh, yeah: "Nigger".
It may be vulgar, but it's still protected freedom of speech.
You do not have the right to not be offended. Especially when you're a nasty (another "n" word) little thieving brat.
That cracker is retarded.
Which is protected by the First Amendment.
In America, you are allowed to be a racist and to read Mein Kampf.
Freedom of Speech is ugly. But it is protected.
BS. If a word is likely to cause violence, the party causing the violence is the one to be charged, not the party exercising their right of free speech.
They are ALL “autistic.” Nearly 25 years ago I (briefly) sent my kids to an urban elementary school and at a bowling birthday party, a black mom talked about how much money she gets per month for her “autistic” son’s disability. I felt bad for her - until I heard EVERY other black mom there say the exact same thing, some of them for 4 or 5 kids apiece. They were getting thousands per month for this crap. BIG red pill that day. My kids didn’t finish the year, especially as those fake austists started bullying them (and the teacher) too. We paid up for a parochial school and never looked back. I can’t imagine how much worse this grift is NOW.
“Do they cover far worse crimes committed by blacks against whites?”
They did cover the karmelo Anthony crime and trial.
About 18-20 years ago I was on a bus, and a group of black teenagers used the “N” word more times in 20 minutes than I’d heard whites use it in 20 years.
I know a woman who was young child during China’s Cultural Revolution.
While visiting her mother’s place of work (families often lived in the compound of the factory or bureau they worked for) as a 4-5 year old she was playing a version of “duck, duck goose” with a couple other children
They started instead saying “counter-revolutionary” while running around and tapping the adults in the office with sticks. The kids didn’t know what the word meant, but heard it all the time....
As one of her first memories, she remembers the room of adults suddenly turning icy and angry. Some people started to yell. Her mother quickly grabbed her and carried her out of the room, and was furious with her
Point being - don’t say the USA can’t turn marxist over speech. In many aspects we already have.
Minnesota, America’s D student with respect to the Constitution, is at it again.
Of course, the jury will find her guilty of speech “likely to cause violence.” Because she used THAT word.
And the SC will overturn it because, outside of very few exceptions, you can say anything you want to anyone you want in the USA, and thank God for that.
“Likely to cause violence” is not, and has never been, an exception to the First Amendmment. For very good reasons.
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.