Letters to the Editor

This letter is associated with the following article:
Read other letters about this article
Is Briana Waters a terrorist?
In an alarming case, U.S. attorneys exploited post-9/11 counterterrorism policies to pursue and prosecute an environmental activist.
By Tracy Tullis [2008-03-27]

  • For all intents and purposes

    Joe INTENTIONALLY burns down Bill's house. Joe does it because:

    a. Bill's house is built in a wetland.

    b. Bill is sleeping with Joe's wife.

    c. Bill is a total asshole.

    d. Bill is black.

    e. Bill is an Irish-Cajun-Cuban mix.

    f. Bill's house blocks Joe's view.

    g. Bill is a Republican.

    h. Bill is a Democrat.

    i. Bill is Joe's secret lover.

    j. Joe is a pyromaniac.

    k. Bill is an environmentalist, and Joe hates environmentalists.

    Or combinations of the above, or a million more.

    I can see how any of these motivations could provide one of the elements of the crime of arson by proving motive. They could convince the jury the fire was not an accident. But which of these motives should we choose to designate as crimes in themselves, and allow lower standards of proof, different investigative techniques, and longer jail sentences because of those intents?

    So, the pyromaniac that was one of the ELFs should go a SHORTER sentence BECAUSE he was a pyromaniac and his real intent was not political? How does that make sense?

    -- JackSparx
    [Read JackSparx's other letters]
    Friday, March 28, 2008 07:32 AM
Read other letters about this article

Letters Help