Posted on 07/16/2020 5:34:41 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
The federal government says it was arson. The protester charged with igniting a Molotov cocktail outside the District of Columbia police station during the recent race riots says it is protected First Amendment speech.
Jarrett Jeremy Pace, on the night he set the fire, had said on Facebook he wanted to “burn a 12 station to the ground!” The number “12” is street slang for police.
But now, Mr. Pace argues in federal district court he was speaking metaphorically, that he actually tossed the firebomb on the street near the Fourth District police station rather than at it, and that his action was not meant to burn the station but rather to express solidarity with George Floyd and protesters in Minneapolis.
“Ranging from inappropriate to deplorable, fire has historically been used as an expression of speech,” Eugene Ohm, Mr. Pace’s lawyer at the federal public defender’s office, wrote in briefs asking for his release.
Arson cases are mounting daily as Justice Department prosecutors, under the urging of President Trump and Attorney General William P. Barr, scour the last seven weeks’ protests, looking for cases to make into federal crimes.
On Wednesday alone, prosecutors announced charges against six men in New York, all accused of igniting fires aimed at government property in Rochester and Buffalo. Prosecutors in Seattle announced arson charges against a man they say set a fire outside a city police precinct there.
Mr. Pace was initially charged in superior court in the District but had the case sent to federal district court days later.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Only if he doesn’t throw it.
The minute it leaves his hand, it becomes assault, attempted murder, or arson.
I bet the court buys it.
Arson and the threat of arson has always been a special kind of heinous crime too because of the potential to destroy civilization if you just let people burn things down.
Next it’ll be pointing a pistol at a cop’s head is protected by the First Amendment.
Was it a “mostly peaceful’ Molotov cocktail?
The only way one could argue that lighting a Molotov cocktail was indeed free speech, is if the speaker proceeded to stuff said lit cocktail down the front of his or her pants. That way, the symbolic nature of the lighting would be shown, and would not be considered arson. Otherwise, 10 to 25 in Federal prison.
To put it another way: The rights of your fist, stop at my face.
Tossing a molotov is like firing a gun. It is no longer symbolic.
In some certain instances it might be. But during a violent riot.. not so much.
Ok, So douse him in lighter fluid and light his ass up in the name of Free Speech!!!
DC court he walks.
“...Next, it’ll be pointing a pistol at a cop’s head is protected by the First Amendment....”
IF/when it comes to that, THAT will become a two-edged sword that works both ways.
Bet he was always the last kid picked for a team in gym class
Glad the guy is acknowledging his actions. Guilty. Twenty years at hard labor. Bailiff, call the next case.
“Eugene Ohm, Mr. Pace’s lawyer at the federal public defender’s office”
Yeah, I don’t think we have a whole lot to worry about if he couldn’t find a better mouthpiece than this.
Question for the panel...if you light a Molotov, but don’t throw it, what will happen? Will it just burn like a lamp, or explode, or...?
But, but...the First Amendment was part of a document written and ratified by dead, white slave owners.
If its glass, it’ll get hot and shatter. If its plastic, it’ll get hot and melt. If its steel, it’ll get hot and you cant hold it.
Believe me..I and a few of our friends tried that when we were young and stupid. Lucky that nobody got hurt and we were WAAAY out in the country so nobody knew.
Only thing that happened is we got an education the hard way.
There is a video I saw on a show of an Animal Liberation Front member speaking at a college campus that said protesting with a poster was the same as with a fire bomb. It’s the same leftist mentality. They destroy what they don’t like.
So, if we tarred and feathered this snowflake and then threw him into the river, that would be considered Free Speech?
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.