Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 577 posts

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#111

Post by godwinson__4-8 »

mvdtnz wrote: post #96
goatlover wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are ICE detentions legal? Is what ICE under the current administration behaving legally? The shooting an officer is the one crime, assuming the protestor wasn't shot at first. This administration has repeatedly lied about these sort of events, so I have a hard time believing the official account.

How is that relevant to my comment?

Obviously because the nature of demonstrations as you describe are predicated on a counter party that follows the law.

For example one may demonstrate to get a law changed, on the premise that they will not be shot on sight or otherwise extrajudically punished for assembling. Why would you expect entities of the state that behave illegally to engender an opposition to follow legal norms?

This is not new in America. 250 years ago the Declaration was preceded by the olive branch. To the people that founded this country, the distinction meant everything.

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#112

Post by felixgallo »

appreciatorBus wrote: post #26
xrd wrote: post #3

Up until now these crazy cases have been rejected by the courts. But this feels like a crack in the dam. A judge actually sentenced someone to 30 years for hiding zines, zines that had been published for years. This was under the pretense hiding those zines was hiding evidence of criminality. And the criminality was worth 75 years. For someone who was at a protest where a federal agent was shot, but was not the shoot…

I think all of this hinges on whether or not you think it was a protest. If they had been peacefully sitting outside the facility holding signs, I think you'd have a case that the sentencing is insane. But if they were actively planning a break-in & preparing to use deadly force, that's quite another matter. I haven't spent a lot of timing reading about it, but what I have read suggests it was much closer to the latt…

'they' is doing a lot of work. This guy wasn't even there.

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#113

Post by anigbrowl »

joe_mamba wrote: post #85
ipython wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shifting the goal posts. I’m talking about the selective prosecution and you’ve tried to equate that with hn sentiment. Does it really matter what the double standard is for a bunch of keyboard warriors arguing over imaginary internet points? No! But it makes a shit ton of difference when the state, with a monopoly on violence and justice, makes a public showing over its double standard. That double standard has impa…

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#114

Post by glitch003 »

axus wrote: post #84
paisawalla wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

If I were transporting copies of this magazine, am I concealing evidence? What is special about this guy? Is there anything he could have legally transported, or is everything she's written banned? The irony of The Intercept requiring my identity is funny.

she called her husband, from jail, and asked him to move them so they couldn't be used in court against her. she said "do whatever you have to do". the cops listened to the phone call, watched him load them into the car and arrested him on the drive. i think it's pretty straightforward that she was asking for his help in obstructing the investigation by hiding potential evidence against her.

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#115

Post by sorry_outta_gas »

will4274 wrote: post #92
Ukv wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The 30 year sentence was for hiding documentation [...] it wasn't just "transporting Zines" As far as I can tell, the moving of zines (he was pulled over and had a box in his car) is what's being presented as "hiding documentation" - not something beyond that. > being sought under a federal warrant Timeline seems to be that a warrant was obtained after pulling him over ("Sanchez-Estrada was then arrested on state t…

Being aware that he was moving the zines to obstruct a federal felony investigation is surely relevant. Intent is an important aspect of crime.

[dead]

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#116

Post by find0x90 »

f33d5173 wrote: post #69
mvdtnz wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was this a "demonstration" though? They turned up to a detention center in the middle of the night and launched an attack clearly with the intention of getting past the gate (text message exchanges show they had scoped out the operations of the gate, how long it takes to open/close, how long it remains open, etc). That's not really a "demonstration", no one outside of the facility would even see it. Demonstrations sh…

It's one of those irregular verbs. My demonstration, your freedom fighting, their act of terrorism

Yes, thank you, Bernard.

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#117

Post by RIMR »

mvdtnz wrote: post #43
expedition32 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chilling effect on demonstrations. If you attend one were someone starts shooting you become an accomplice. And ofcourse this also leaves the door open for a "false flag" incident.

Was this a "demonstration" though? They turned up to a detention center in the middle of the night and launched an attack clearly with the intention of getting past the gate (text message exchanges show they had scoped out the operations of the gate, how long it takes to open/close, how long it remains open, etc). That's not really a "demonstration", no one outside of the facility would even see it. Demonstrations sh…

That's really hard to swallow when the current president, who is responsible for the extreme uptick in ICE activity, pardoned 1,600 people who conspired against the federal government in favor of his agenda, but then that same government hands life-ruining prison sentences to people who weren't even present for conspiring against ICE.

Especially when the crux of this entire case was that the convicted are members of a terrorist organization - a fact that was declared at the whim of this same president.

I'm not saying that some of the people convicted don't deserve consequences for their actions, especially violence like shooting at officers. I'm not saying that this was a lawful assembly, especially given the documented intent to breach the facility and use pyrotechnics offensively. I am saying that this is an extreme escalation in action against dissent against the Republican agenda, with a highly visible inequality in enforcement against those who dissent similarly against the Democratic agenda.

If this kind of heavy-handed action was taken against everyone who challenges our government, I would still be concerned, but it is doubly concerning that some members of our society appear to have the permission to do these things, while we destroy the lives of others with different politics.

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#118

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

paisawalla wrote: post #59
OutOfHere wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh. None of your first three points is meant to be illegal. - coordinating using a Signal group - bringing firearms, body armor, and first aid kits to a location just outside a federal facility - taking up a concealed position along a tree line For you to even list them shows a fascist bent. As for fireworks, they might not be illegal either. The only possible crime is the shooting, and only if it was not done in se…

[flagged]

> I think if you append "with the intention to commit a violent crime" to each item on the list, you'll see the issue.

That's problematic as you could literally append that to any action and thus condemn it as illegal e.g. met to have some coffees and a chat ... with the intention to commit a violent crime.

The problem is that there's not necessarily any connection between the activity and the alleged violent crime - that's what needs to be proven such as highlighting specific signal conversations that were evidence of planning the crime.

Also, what is problematic about first aid kits? How is being in a "concealed" position problematic?

Re: 30-year sentence for transporting zines is a five-alarm fire for free speech

#119

Post by customguy »

will4274 wrote: post #92
Ukv wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The 30 year sentence was for hiding documentation [...] it wasn't just "transporting Zines" As far as I can tell, the moving of zines (he was pulled over and had a box in his car) is what's being presented as "hiding documentation" - not something beyond that. > being sought under a federal warrant Timeline seems to be that a warrant was obtained after pulling him over ("Sanchez-Estrada was then arrested on state t…

Being aware that he was moving the zines to obstruct a federal felony investigation is surely relevant. Intent is an important aspect of crime.

In what way could that possibly have obstructed that investigation?
Post reply on HN