Trooper ambush suspect charged with terrorism

Mods if this is in the wrong forum please move.
Thank you

The man accused of opening fire on a Pennsylvania State Police barracks admitted killing a trooper because he was dissatisfied with government and wanted to "wake people up," according to court documents filed Thursday that provided the first indication of a possible motive.

Eric Frein spoke of wanting to start a revolution in a letter to his parents and called the slaying of Cpl. Bryon Dickson an "assassination" in a police interview after his Oct. 30 capture, the documents said...

..."Tension is high at the moment and the time seems right for a spark to ignite a fire in the hearts of men. What I have done has not been done before and it felt like it was worth a try," said the letter.

Sounds like he is trying to be a martyr to the cause of reinstating the U. S. Constitution or being set up as such.

Police refused to tell Frein that his family had hired an attorney for him the night he was captured, according to defense attorney James Swetz, who said he was prevented from seeing Frein at the barracks.

"I was told, 'He's an adult and has not asked for a lawyer,'" Swetz recounted earlier this week.

www.msn.com...

This sounds like he might get off on a technicality.

I do not approve of his methods and I think he had the wrong targets.
The police are not the enemy, it is the international Business Leaders and Bankers who have bought our "representatives" that are the enemies of the people.

He is not going to get off on a technicality. They have him and there's no way in hell they'll let this go.

The police are not the enemy

Who do you think enforces the will of those Bankers and Leaders?
I don't agree with the guy's methods at all. If he had a problem, he should have went to the top law enforcement officials, news papers, TV or start a internet campaign.. All he did was make himself look insane and draw sympathy for the police.

a reply to: RedmoonMWC

because he wanted to make a change (in government) and that voting was inefficient to do so, because there was no one worth voting for," according to a criminal complaint.

Many will agree with him on this part, regarding voting...

But you are right, his methods are way out of line and this is not the way to get our 'liberties' back to the way they were, if that is even at all possible

What he did was wrong and hope he does not get off due to technicalities

originally posted by: DAVID64
He is not going to get off on a technicality. They have him and there's no way in hell they'll let this go.

The police are not the enemy

Who do you think enforces the will of those Bankers and Leaders?
I don't agree with the guy's methods at all. If he had a problem, he should have went to the top law enforcement officials, news papers, TV or start a internet campaign.. All he did was make himself look insane and draw sympathy for the police.

You are correct in that the police are the enforcement and revenue collectors. But many of them actually think (right or wrong) that they are doing a service for the population in general.
As for getting off on a technicality, it could happen if he chooses to be tried by jury and does not get shot on his way to court.

He also had a personal grievance with the wounded trooper. Shot him in the balls. Pocono Record would be the best source for raw info.

Whatever happened to good old fashioned murder?

Because he's not just a citizen, it's terrorism? I guess that makes him more important than us little people who will only be seen as "Murdered".



Peace

originally posted by: FlyingFox
He also had a personal grievance with the wounded trooper. Shot him in the balls. Pocono Record would be the best source for raw info.

Had not heard this.
Thank you for that.

We all know how our men in blue (black, grey... whatever) respond to cop killers. I think he is lucky to be alive to go to court.

originally posted by: jude11
Whatever happened to good old fashioned murder?

Because he's not just a citizen, it's terrorism? I guess that makes him more important than us little people who will only be seen as "Murdered".



Peace

If they claim terrorism they can sensationalize it more and bring into question anyone who speaks out for or calls for people to "wake up" or eschew voting for the lesser of two (or three etc.) evils.

This is terrorism and Major Hasan is workplace violence?Law enforcement and the judicial system in this country is truly hypocritical.

originally posted by: jude11
Whatever happened to good old fashioned murder?

Because he's not just a citizen, it's terrorism? I guess that makes him more important than us little people who will only be seen as "Murdered".



Peace

I think it is classified as terrorism as a result of his motive, which was to 'wake the people up'. Or in other words, start a revolution of sorts. Considering terrorism is the mostly defined as an act of perpetrating violence and intimidation for the purposes of political causes, the suspect's act may very well fall under the label.

a reply to: daaskapital

Challenging the status quo is definitely terrorism by modern standards, especially when violence is employed.

originally posted by: snarky412
a reply to: RedmoonMWC

because he wanted to make a change (in government) and that voting was inefficient to do so, because there was no one worth voting for," according to a criminal complaint.

Many will agree with him on this part, regarding voting...

But you are right, his methods are way out of line and this is not the way to get our 'liberties' back to the way they were, if that is even at all possible

What he did was wrong and hope he does not get off due to technicalities

They say when peaceful resolve does not work violent revolution becomes inevitable..

I have nothing to say after this but maybe that is what he was thinking since he seems to probably have been a member of ATS...

a reply to: daaskapital

Completely agree. Terrorism doesn't just mean Islamic extremist or vast network of ne'er do wells.

If he was just pissed off at the local cops that would be something different but he tried to affect (effect? whatever) change through violence.

The crazy conspiracist in me says that by tacking on terrorist charges they can probably use some provision of the Patriot Act to insure this guy doesn't get a jury trial. If this guy had some legitimate beef with the state trooper, a jurist that has seen too much police misconduct on TV or the internet might be sympathetic. If this guy walks out of a court, I bet no one would sell him life insurance.

I want the guy to get all he deserves, but am I the only one that really dislikes the use of terrorism as a charge to the point I think it can be abused and used in just about anyway the Government feels like using it.

a reply to: Xtrozero

NVM.

Interesting how this guy is charged as a terrorist while Nidal Hasan was not. In fact, if I remember correctly, despite being charged with multiple counts of murder, the act was labeled as "workplace violence". Perhaps it is simply a difference between the military justice system and the civilian justice system. Or maybe it has more to do with the best course for conviction. Whether it's just a case of semantics or something more, it's quite the head-scratcher.