Posted on 05/09/2009 11:15:53 AM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
He is NOT being held under the Patriot Act (the crazy mother has even admitted that she had no evidence for that claim), nor is he being given any different access to counsel than anyone arrested for any sort of crime. These were just wild stories making the rounds on the Internet, based on his mother’s unfounded claims. The credibility of these tales is right up there with the “Mumia is innocent and he’s being framed because he’s black” tales.
This kid has been engaging in organized crime, disrupting the productive activities of people all over the country and costing businesses, schools, and law enforcement (read: taxpayers) a great deal of money to deal with the fallout from his threats. His mother has been lying to the whole world (and her claims *were* picked up by foreign media outlets), claiming his IP address had been hacked and somebody else made the threats, while she knew full well all along that he was making them.
She belongs in jail to, and if she then wants to starting making up claims that she’s being “held under the Patriot Act” or “not being given access to counsel”, we should all have the good sense to ignore her. BTW, she says she “doesn’t allow guns around my children” and “doesn’t believe in guns”, so apparently she’s not really too concerned about government tyranny.
So where are they supposed to send him? Back to his mother, who knew all about his illegal activities and allowed them to continue, and then lied to the media about her son's illegal activities and the circumstances of his arrest? A foster home maybe? Sure, plenty of foster parents would love to have this kid < /s> And there's hardly any need for bail, when there's no reasonable place to send him that isn't in some sort of secure custody. Nor would be it reasonable to allow bail for a fairly sophisticated juvenile cybercriminal, whose upbringing has involved parental approval of such activities.
He most certainly IS a threat -- bomb threats can result in serious injuries or even deaths during a panicked evacuation, and always incur significant expense. This kid was not a one-time or occasional prankster; he was progressing in the severity of his crimes, and needed to be stopped. He shouldn't be allowed out on the streets for at least a few years, and only then after he's successfully undergone some heavy-duty psych treatment.
Yes, I forget the link, but there was no one bit of truth to her statements.
Thanks GovernmentShrinker for being the good statist you are....
This kid isn’t a threat to national security, no matter what you or anyone else thinks, the government should set bail, send the kid home to await trial and sentencing, and get onto the real business of investigating the real threats to our country....
Cripplecreek, as the mother of a teenaged boy your Aunt is one of my personal heroes.
mrs
“This kid isn’t a threat to national security,...”
I never said he was a threat to national security. He’s been accused of communicating threats (bomb threats) for pay - which is criminal activity. He has been arraigned in a court and has been ordered held without bail, just like any other suspect.
Based on the evidence, the nature of the crime, the defendant's age, and the improbability that the kid will be making any more bomb threats while awaiting trial, there's no real reason to deny bail. Naturally, you disagree. Let's just agree disagree amiably....
DTT: domestic terrorist teenager
I guess he was mad he couldn't get a "homejob".
"Mommy, they made me cry! Make them stop!"
The way I heard it he was in jail without possibility of bail for two months before his arraignment. Is that true? If true was it proper conduct by law enforcement? If proper conduct was it overkill?
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.