Prosecutors pointed to the guns, ballistic vests, and trauma first-aid kits they brought as evidence of malicious intent.
Wait a minute. This has very distinct Kyle Rittenhouse vibes.
this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2026
539 points (98.6% liked)
News
36714 readers
2271 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Prosecutors pointed to the guns, ballistic vests, and trauma first-aid kits they brought as evidence of malicious intent.
Didn't police also bring those things ... ?
Doesn't matter. They could be in a tank and youll be arrested for being near a bicycle.
'They were clearly planning to flee the scene of the crime on an unregistered, potentially deadly, vehicle.'
That's why they think it means malicious intent, obviously.
Projection. Just like everything else
Man this country needs to get serous about juries because it seems that there's no point to them.
Also what the fuck is "concealing a document" and how the fuck is it a crime.
Additionally, how is it not double-jeopardy to convict someone of
- Firing a firearm
- Firing a firearm while firing a firearm
Having been to jury duty last year. They really hit you with a ton of propaganda. They basically try to brainwash all potential jurors before even getting to actual jury selection. People need to know thier rights. They do not in fact have to vote guilty based on the instructions of the judge. They are supposed to make up thier own minds. It's intended to be a check and balance on the judicial system.
They basically try to brainwash all potential jurors before even getting to actual jury selection. People need to know thier rights. They do not in fact have to vote guilty based on the instructions of the judge. They are supposed to make up thier own minds. It’s intended to be a check and balance on the judicial system.
I'll say! I came this close to being on a jury, they need 12 plus some number of alts (3?) and I think I was down to < 20 at that point. Anyway, when questioned on the "following instructions" bit I think I waffled just enough on that to get bounced.
But yeah, fuck that: we need more jury nullification on things like this. Don't bow to "the law" if you think it's bullshit.
I waffle on being honest when answering such questions, knowing it will target me for removal, and saying what they want to hear so I can get on the jury and do the job correctly. It's a tough call, in large part because I have IBS, and could need to run to the bathroom at anytime. And being required to not do that makes it more likely to occur (anxiety is a trigger among other things).
The jury I did get selected for was sort of the opposite. The prosecution didn't "prove" thier case, but it was still obvious the guy was guilty. They only needed 10 of 12 to convict at that time. He would have been free if they needed 12 because one guy clearly said he would never vote to convict because the prison system itself was unjust. I kinda agree with him too though.
I got out of jury conscription by phrasing my refusal in terms of religion. They let my whole group go, I think because of my sermon.
It's pretty wild that you can get out of jury duty for religion but not for secular reasoned principles. I would prefer not to talk about religion but I was desperate to escape.
I think it's supposed to be for like deleting logs or financial records when a search is imminent. But in that case it's based on the stuff you're concealing containing evidence of a crime. Some zines aren't that.
This is at least 2.5 of jeopardy
Remember when the alt-right guys were prosecuted for their khakis-and-polo-shirts, escape-by-blending-into-a-crowd uniforms that demonstrated malice aforethought?
No, me neither.
A police officer responding to the scene was shot in the neck by one of the protesters, Benjamin Song, who had brought an AR-15 with a trigger modified for a higher rate of fire.
The defendants said the protest was a peaceful demonstration meant to show solidarity, pointing to the megaphone that one member of the group brought to shout slogans to detainees. Prosecutors pointed to the guns, ballistic vests, and trauma first-aid kits they brought as evidence of malicious intent.
It had little to do with the colour of their clothes and I highly doubt that was something the jury took into deliberation.
“Material support. It sounds — I don’t know — nefarious. Complicated. It’s actually very simple,” Smith said.
He said that wearing black clothes at the noise demonstration would be enough to convict the eight defendants accused of material support.
In a significant victory for the government, jurors convicted eight defendants on material support for terrorism charges for wearing black clothes to the late-night demonstration. That use of “black bloc” clothing was an antifa tactic that assisted in the shooting of the officer, prosecutors said during their closing arguments.
It had everything to do with the color of their clothes. Did you even read the article?
load more comments
(2 replies)
It had little to do with the colour of their clothes and I highly doubt that was something the jury took into deliberation.
You are wrong about that:
In a significant victory for the government, jurors convicted eight defendants on material support for terrorism charges for wearing black clothes to the late-night demonstration. That use of “black bloc” clothing was an antifa tactic that assisted in the shooting of the officer, prosecutors said during their closing arguments.
ONE guy was charged and convicted on the weapons charges, but EIGHT defendants were convicted based on their black clothing.
They were also charged with concealing their 'zines. It seems like both the 'zines and the clothing would be strongly protected by the 1st Amendment. This will be appealed all the way to the Supreme Courts. I want to see how they feel about criminalizing particular colors, especially one like black, which SCOTUS likes to wear themselves.
Of course, traditionally, SCOTUS is supposed to be ANTIFA also.
A police officer responding to the scene was shot in the neck by one of the protester
Finally, some good news.
I think it's not so much about these people. They are the precedent. For future arrests and court cases involving antifa, it's important for the prosecutor that these guys are put away as antifa. Antifa has a new meaning now, a bit closer to terrorism.
Also, coming as a group, with guns, one person hiding in a bush with an automatic rifle and actually firing, at a cop. In a country that is known for fucked up accomplice liability laws. Not very smart.
Fucking hell! This is some bullshit.
Terrorism is controlling people's behavior by making them afraid.
In the United States, there’s one group of people doing that, and it ain't antifa, folks.
It’s always Antifa. Except when it’s trans people, or muslims, or Spanish speaking people, or Greenland.
The Constitution is TERRORISM (UNLESS you're Using it to Shoot up a Bunch of Children!)!
-LITERALLY Republicans!
Terrorism is the use of violence or threats of violence against a civilian population to achieve a political end.
How is wearing black going to fit into that definition? I don't know.
Terrorism is...
That might be a popular definition but it's not the state's definition. The state's definition is determined by court cases including this one.
What a fucking orwellian dystopia.
Dress like ICE.
Oooo, curious what they'd say. "Impersonating a federal agent" might be the first thing that comes up.
Just don’t wear anything that says “ICE”. But wear khakis, masks, sunglasses, hat, etc that matches the colors.
Create confusion.
Is this the one where the judge declared a mistrial on some made up pretext because the first jury pool was too sympathetic to the defendants?
Same result would happen if they wore all pink, its not about the clothes its about sending a message and terrorizing people
its about sending a message and terrorizing people
If only there was some snappy term for that 🤔
I wish Lemmy had a paywall tagging feature.
Hey man, I dress all black because I'm a ninja, that's part of my heritage
Fuck it. Color coordinate all future protests.
Well, this can't end well...
Nothing the US government is doing will end well.
Well I am gonna dress so vibrant at my next priest you will see me from space
Apparently Johnny Cash was a terrorist....
Big titty goth girlfriend at risk
When do these yahoos get to define what "antifa" means?
They define what anything means whenever and however they want. Twisting and confusing language is one of the most important tools for fascists.
I guess I mean I want them to just do the unpacking of what the "fa" stands for. And then I went to see them do some extreme mental gymnastics about how being against fascism is a bad thing.
view more: next ›