It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pre-thought crime: Terry Jones convicted for "breach of peace" for ATTEMPTED protest.

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Now these nuts are going WAY overboard with their abuse of the legal system; they arrested "Pastor" Terry Jones for his intent to hold a peaceful protest because of fears that the people he was protesting against might get violent.


Detroit jury finds Terry Jones guilty of breach of peace for attempted protest outside Islamic center

He wanted to protest outside the Islamic center in Dearborn but the city refused him a permit, fearful that some local Muslim might go nuts as a result. So they put him on trial, with the jury asked to determine what they thought his intent would be in holding the protest. If they thought his aim was peaceful, he’d be found not guilty; if they thought he meant to incite violence, then guilty as charged. Verdict: Guilty. Which means not only was this guy convicted of a speech crime he hadn’t yet committed (a.k.a. prior restraint), but it was only a crime in the first place because of the expected reaction from his opponents. In other words, it’s a de facto codification of the heckler’s veto.

Hot Air

The judge, knowing that the whole thing was bogus set Jones' "peace bond" at only $1.00 but Jones refused to pay and was carted off to jail. The Judge also barred Jones from the Mosque and adjacent areas for three years.

Even the sheriff acknowledged that it wasn't Jones who presented a threat to the peace:


Dearborn Police Chief Ronald Haddad also took the stand to testify. Chief Haddad denied the permit request that would allow the protest to take place outside of the mosque. He testified that there were concerns over safety.

Terry Jones also questioned Chief Haddad. He referred to a conversation he had with the Chief and asked him what his impression was after they had met. Chief Haddad responded that Jones was cordial and did not appear to be violent in nature.

WXYZ News 7


Dearborn Police Chief Ronald Haddad testified today that there have been at least four serious threats made against Jones from metro Detroiters, arguing that his protest could lead to violence if allowed.

Det roit Free Press

They as much as admitted that Jones was not violent and it was not HIM that they feared violence from but, he was the one dragged off to jail because someone else may have been violent against him.


You may not agree with Jones but he still has a right to have a voice and to hold a protest if he wishes. Denying him this right before anything ever happened is a gross violation of his Constitutional rights and will set a precedent that could be used to shut down other peaceful protests in the future.




posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   
#1 The [SNIP] "Pastor" was intending on burning the Koran in the biggest Muslim city in Michigan.
#2 He was armed (which tells me he wanted it to get violent)
#3 What is the point of taking the actions he was taking unless he wanted to incite conflict?

I think that he is right up there with Westboro in being a wolf in sheeps clothing.


edit on 26-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: (no reason given)


Mod Edit: Snipped censor circumvention
edit on 27-4-2011 by Gemwolf because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by coyotepoet
 


And don't forget, he "accidentally" discharged his firearm.

In the tv station parking lot with the cops around, no less.




posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem


Now these nuts are going WAY overboard with their abuse of the legal system; they arrested "Pastor" Terry Jones for his intent to hold a peaceful protest because of fears that the people he was protesting against might get violent.


How can it be peaceful when the point of the protes was to be armed and Terry himself even discharged his gun?
I a afraid people will blindly defending anything if it upsets Muslims.

Let me reframe it for you. A bunch of Americans went to the hometown of other Americans to burn their holy book and walk around with guns. This had nothing to do with enemies or "others." This is one set of Americans trying to piss of another set of Americans and clinging to a gun while they do it. That is not my America.

Terry needs to get his behind over to the Middle East and take whatever armed stand he feels is so important. I wish him luck with his demonizing of enemies, he just needs to leave Americans the hell alone.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by notsofunnyguy
reply to post by coyotepoet
 


And don't forget, he "accidentally" discharged his firearm.

In the tv station parking lot with the cops around, no less.



If they wanted to lock him up and prevent the protest, they should have used that to arrest him. Apparently he was carrying the gun legally or he would be in jail for that right now. With all the death threats against him for burning a book, who can blame him?

Even the Muslim leaders said the arrest was a mistake and an abuse of his rights:


“This is a complete abuse of the court process, and all those involved should be ashamed,” said Rana Elmir of the ACLU Michigan office. “The prosecutor’s office and the Dearborn court turned the First Amendment on its head. What happened today should never have happened.”

Elmir, Sedler and even Muslim leaders said the prosecutor’s actions had played right into the hands of Jones by giving a him a platform and his supporters a reason to bash Dearborn, whose sizable Muslim community drew Jones here.

DFP

The Detroit police and prosecutors are playing into Jones' hands with this arrest by confirming that the government fears irrational violence from Muslims, exactly the message Jones wishes to spread.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 08:16 PM
link   
The first amendment only applies to others in todays pc society.
It's only gonna get worse before people have had enough and handle the problems themselves without waiting for a racist politically correct government to do anything. France is actually making us look bad when it comes to dealing with the muzzie problem, who'd have thought?



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by coyotepoet
#1 The a**h**e "Pastor" was intending on burning the Koran in the biggest Muslim city in Michigan.
#2 He was armed (which tells me he wanted it to get violent)
#3 What is the point of taking the actions he was taking unless he wanted to incite conflict?

I think that he is right up there with Westboro in being a wolf in sheeps clothing.


#1- Nothing in the article said he wanted to burn a Koran at this protest, although I will concede that he is an A-hole "pastor", that doesn't mean that his rights are forfeit.

#2- There have been death threats made against him since he had his big Koran burning event. He was probably carrying for his own protection and did not intend to use the gun at the intended protest. Nothing in the article indicated that weapons were to be a part of the intended protest. The fact that it went off during the press conference only shows that he's an idiot and doesn't know how to handle his own gun.

#3- The point of the protest is to highlight the violent image of the Muslim community, an image that the Detroit prosecutor helped to foster by arresting the "pastor" before anything could happen.


I don't agree with what he is saying or the way he goes about saying it but, his rights were violated in a most blatant manner and when the courts act in such a tyrannical manner, everybody should be upset, no matter whose rights it were that were trampled.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


You mean the peaceful ARMED protest??? wow.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 09:08 PM
link   
"I went out walking, with a Bible and a gun..."
Johnny Cash - "The Wanderer"
from U2's "Zooropa"

The man is in need of some serious psychiatry. What exactly does he hope to accomplish?

Edit to add:

He'd fit right in at the Westboro Baptist cult...
edit on 4/26/2011 by this_is_who_we_are because: wbc



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by adifferentbreed
The first amendment only applies to others in todays pc society.


Terry can say whatever he likes. He has proven he can burn whatever he likes. He can stand in his church and say anything he wants. When he travels to bring guns into another community, he has to respect those American's rights as well. I guess the constitution only applies to anti-Muslim rednecks.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by My.mind.is.mine
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


You mean the peaceful ARMED protest??? wow.


You mean to tell me that the only part of the article you read was this?


Prosecutors also brought up safety concerns about Terry Jones carrying a firearm after his weapon accidentally discharged in the parking lot at Detroit TV State WJBK Thursday night. No one was injured.


He had the gun outside a news station and there is no indication that he intended to use it or brandish it at his intended protest. He carries it legally for his own self defense, otherwise he would have been charged for that incident.

Is every protest where somebody is carrying a concealed weapon automatically an "armed protest"? When a 2nd amendment group holds a rally, they often practice their right to open carry, I guess you would call that an "armed protest" as well.


I don't think so. People have a right to defend themselves against violence in this country and they have the right to peaceably assemble to address their grievances. Simply having a weapon on your person for self defense doesn't make a protest violent or an "armed protest".

The state should not be able to herd people into "authorized protest zones" in order to keep society from being disrupted. The whole purpose of holding a protest is to shake things up and to cause some disruption in order to get the attention of people in power to let them know that they are not addressing your concerns. The act of protesting must cause some type of disruption in order to be effective.

The controls they have placed on protestors and the places they are allowed to protest is one of the main reasons the government doesn't listen to its people anymore. They know our protests have no power to disrupt their plans and have no fear of protestors affecting their policy decisions.

Jones and the Westboro Baptists are unlikable trolls who are being used by TPTB to create an atmosphere in which we will accept restrictions on our freedom of speech in order to curb such excesses.

We must fight to defend their right to say what we find unacceptable before someone in the future decides that what we have to say is equally unacceptable and has us all silenced.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Well if you read the history of this current episode in the sad, crappy saga that is Terry Jones' life, you'd know that he URGED attendees to come to the protest armed.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


I live close enough to Dearborn that this was local news.

I think the courts/prosecutor were in over their heads, bringing up an unchallenged archaic law to stop Jones, and then keeping him in court all day Friday.

I think Jones wants to make a First Amendment stand on this issue.
I also think he is concerned over the rise of the alleged use of Sharia law in this country.

Several states are considering -- or have passed -- bills banning the use of Islamic law. Last year, Louisiana lawmakers passed an anti-Shari'a bill. In recent months, Texas legislators have cited Dearborn in considering a similar bill. Tennessee also is considering an anti-Shari'a bill. And this week, the Missouri House approved a bill that would ban Shari'a.

Last year, Oklahoma voters approved a ballot measure that would have banned Shari'a law, but a judge later ruled it unconstitutional.

Conservatives point to some cases where judges have cited Islamic law in making decisions. That includes a Florida case involving a dispute at a local mosque, where a judge ruled this year that to resolve one crucial issue in the case, he would consult Islamic law.

Activists also are taking legal action. Earlier this year, the Ann Arbor-based Thomas More Law Center filed a lawsuit against Dearborn, claiming that city officials were influenced by Shari'a when police arrested Christian missionaries last year at an Arab festival.

www.freep.com...

I do not approve of his methods, but we need to be vigilant of our First Amendment rights and the potential creeping of religious law into our lives.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   
By taking away Jones' right to protest, they also took away the opportunity for the Muslim community to show that Jones is wrong in his assessment of Islam.

They could have shown that they were capable of rising above Jones' provocation and were able to respond to his protest without violence. By arresting Jones, the prosecutors took away the Muslim community's opportunity to prove Jones wrong.


Any time the courts decide to act against someone for something they might do or because of the possible consequences of their future actions they take away from everybody's freedom. Asking the jury to make their determination based upon what they thought Jones' INTENT was in holding the protest is the definition of a thought crime. If they decided that it was not his intent to incite violence, then his actions would have been legal regardless of the results of his actions.

People should be judged on what they have already done and the consequences of their actions. This whole pre-crime mentality is the reason air travelers are groped and treated like criminals for exercising their right to travel.

It doesn't make people feel safer, it only makes the people feel more CONTROLLED.

edit on 4/26/11 by FortAnthem because:



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


So basically, somebody can come stand in front of my house, piss on my door mat, TP my house, egg my windows and doors, pour gasoline all around my house, mess up my garden, and put fircrackers in my mailbox, and that's not considered a violation, it's considered his right!?? And it's my "opportunity" to show that I'm peaceful???

Maybe, just MAYBE, it's him CONTINUING to take advantage of his "opportunity" to show he's a [SNIP]..

Mod Edit: Removed unacceptable word
edit on 27-4-2011 by Gemwolf because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 





People should be judged on what they have already done and the consequences of their actions. This whole pre-crime mentality is the reason air travelers are groped and treated like criminals for exercising their right to travel. It doesn't make people feel safer, it only makes the people feel more CONTROLLED


I can't disagree with that, nor can I disagree with what you said about the chance for Muslims not to react but...

I wonder what the reaction would be if someone went to a hardcore Christian town and planned a protest where people were burning, ripping up, and spreading dog poo all over the Bible. Because it's the same thing. Those protesters probably wouldn't be met with "turn the other cheek" I can almost guarantee.

That and the fact that the Muslims are the new "enemy" when in the 50's it was all about Mcarthyism and the Red scare. It's just more psy-ops divide and conquer BS. And all really predicated on Muslim extremists being behind 9/11 when Tim Osman, I mean Osama Bin Laden was a CIA asset right up until then.

So this guy goes in for an armed protest, intending to burn a sacred text, and somehow it would be the Muslim's fault for retaliating? A friend calls it "Poking the Jellyfish" and that's exactly what he was doing.

So, while the idea of pre-crime is rather disconcerting, and I don't agree with it from that perspective and I advocate freedom of speech, think about how you would feel and react if someone were to burn or crap on something you were really emotional about and then said it was free speech.


edit on 26-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: punctuation



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem
By taking away Jones' right to protest, they also took away the opportunity for the Muslim community to show that Jones is wrong in his assessment of Islam.


Jones lost the right to protest? I thought he lost the right to protest with guns he had no clue how to safely handle? His right to protest interfered with the rights of people not be accidentally shot at in parking lots. If he left his guns home, there would have been no problem. He did not lose any rights.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Jones lost the right to protest? I thought he lost the right to protest with guns he had no clue how to safely handle? His right to protest interfered with the rights of people not be accidentally shot at in parking lots. If he left his guns home, there would have been no problem. He did not lose any rights.



You just don't pay attention, do you?





Jones' arrest had absolutely nothing to do with his having discharged a firearm at that news station. He was arrested because the police thought his protest was LIKELY to breach the peace.


a jury found a proposed protest by Jones and his associate Wayne Sapp outside the Islamic Center of America, the largest mosque in the United States, was likely to breach the peace and incite violence.

WXYZ

The gun incident was brought up to emphasize the prosecution's safety concerns but, he was not charged in that incident. The main concern of the prosecution was the possibility of violence AGAINST Jones by the members of that Mosque; they feared that Jones would bring violence down upon himself if he proceeded with the protest and, for that he was arrested.

My main issue of concern in this whole thing is the fact that Jones was arrested and convicted before he even had an opportunity to commit a crime. For all we know Jones may have been full of hot air with his threats to hold the protest in spite of the permit denial. He has a history of backing down at the last minute, like the first time he threatened to burn the Koran and gave in to public pressure.

If the police wanted to arrest Jones, they should have met him at the mosque on the day of the protest and arrested him, on the spot, as soon as he began the unlicenced protest.

If the man is breaking the law, then fine, go ahead and lock him up, but, at least make sure he's going to do what he says he' going to do before slapping the cuffs on him. Pre-crime is scary as hell and arresting someone for threatening to do something illegal or, in Jones' case, something they have been denied a government permit for, means that we are now arresting people for their words and not their actions.

How long before saying that you do not support the government on some issue will be considered a crime if this mentality is allowed to take hold?


Me, I'm no fan of Jones or those Westboro Baptist A-holes and I wouldn't shed a tear for them if they all died in some horrible manner (in fact, I'd probably crack a smile
) but, by standing by and allowing their free speech rights to be taken away in this manner, we are giving government the go-ahead to expand their ability to further limit everyone's freedom of speech.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Here's my problem with this pre-thought crime:

You're a young man, first car and you spend a lot to "soup" it up, big tires, fast engine, the works.
You are out on Saturday night in a street know for racing, minding your own business.
Cops sees you, stops you, and ends up arresting you....because you might drag race.
Maybe far-fetched, but it seems to me this is the road we are going down.

Or, you a copy of the Anarchist Cookbook and get visited and eventually arrested because you might be plotting something illegal.

Jones being arrested for something he might do is a very dangerous precedent.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 08:44 PM
link   
I was surprised that Jones wasn't arrested for his accidental discharge so I had to look up the article to find out for myself why he wasn't charged.


Southfield police detail how Pastor Terry Jones accidentally fired handgun outside Fox 2 studios

Southfield Police Department: On April 21, 2011 at approximately 11:10 p.m., Pastor Terry Jones from Gainesville, Florida had just completed an interview at Fox 2 in Southfield, Michigan, as he was entering the passenger side of a vehicle, he retrieved his handgun from the door of the vehicle and he accidently discharged it into the floorboard. No was injured as a result of the accidental discharge of the handgun. A security detail of Southfield Police Officers, who were already on the scene at the request of Fox 2, heard the shot. An investigation was initiated and it was established that Pastor Jones has a valid Florida concealed weapon license and was carrying the weapon, a Taurus, .40 caliber handgun lawfully. A second handgun was located under the driver’s seat of the vehicle, it was established that the handgun belonged to the driver of the vehicle, a 42 year old male from Gainesville, Florida who is an associate of Jones. He also had a valid Florida concealed weapons license.

Based on the initial investigation, it was determined that this was an accidental discharge of a firearm and the filing of criminal charges is not expected. Jones and the other male were released upon the conclusion of the investigation and the weapons were returned.

mlive.com

He's lucky the state has reciprocity with Florida regarding gun permits. Someone needs to show him how to work the safety before he blows his nuts off.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join