They showed jurors pictures of Faella and others dressed in military-style outfits and showed video of weapons training on Faella's property. Prosecutors told jurors that they didn't have to prove a specific plan, just show the group was doing the training for some sort of civil disorder. [More]
Assuming civil disorders can also be responded to, wasn't that once considered a citizen's duty, along with serving on a jury and voting?
Here's the "law." I see "loopholes" you could drive an MRAP through. Who is responsible for this abomination? Anybody gun owners voted for?
As for what they say he "planned" to do, if they have specific evidence of a criminal conspiracy, bring it, and let him have due process on the charge. Otherwise, it seems he ought to actually need to do something evil in terms of threatening and/or initiating force before he's done anything actionable.
As for the guy being a racist, if he hurt anybody, prosecute him. If he didn't, life is full of distasteful people. Tolerance doesn't mean approval, as much as some insist otherwise.
It sounds like the guy refused to plead and the prosecutor was a dick about it, desperate to get something and pretty sure he could find twelve emotion-driven ignoramuses. Not having heard the evidence or participated in deliberations, I'll admit drawing conclusions from an incomplete picture. That said, from what I see here, my first thought is "What the hell is wrong with juries?" My second is "What the hell is wrong with 'the law'?"
The problem with an unsympathetic character like this is the money to appeal can soon run out, and who wants to tie their name in with contributing to a defense fund for him? So Economic Waco wins and bad law gets bolstered.
[Via Florida Guy]
