Re: [OT] Teens face 10 years in prison for riding over pride flag on bicycles

On Sun, 23 Jun 2024 11:47:58 -0700
suzeeq <suzeeq@imbris.com> wrote:

On 6/23/2024 11:27 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> wrote: 

Adam H. Kerman wrote: 

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote: 

 

Leo Kearse, the presenter of this video, is correct: the rules
of the Alphabet Mafia have taken on the feel of blasphemy laws
in the Muslim countries. This is particularly evident in the
horrendous overcharging of three Spokane teens for riding over a
local pride flag on bicycles: 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtS-c4nPJtQ [`12 minutes] 

 

Overcharging? It wasn't even a crime to ride their bicyles in the
first place! 

   

I love how the video clip of the interview of the lesbian witness
shows an automobile driving over the very same painted pavement
as we see over her right shoulder. I didn't see the felony
arrest. 

 

It appears that what we have here is a case of bullying children
because that's what we can get away with. 

 

Every day this NG is filled with examples of why it's become such a
cesspool. 

 

Here is a news story and the police statement: 

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/teens-arrested-after-scooters-leave-marks-on-pride-crosswalk/ar-BB1nSroe
 

 

https://my.spokanecity.org/police/news/2024/06/06/multiple-arrests-make-after-downtown-pride-mural-is-vandalized/
 

 

This happened on June 5, 18 days ago, but is now being widely
shared on right-wing media. These kids were repeatedly riding over
an area described as a "street mural" in order to deface it. The
area had recently been repainted after someone else had
intentionally damaged it using a flammable liquid. The area,
according to the police statement, was "clearly marked to keep
traffic away as it was just re-painted to repair previous damage."
 

 

These kids should have been arrested if they were intentionally
damaging anything painted on the street as a street mural. And if
it had been a US flag I doubt anyone would be complaining. 

 

While the kids were charged with 1st Degree Malicious Mischief, a
class B felony for which the maximum sentence is 10 years, of
course they would not receive anything like that even if they are
convicted. They would probably be put on probation. 

 
In advance of pride parades in Chicago and various suburbs, the
parade routes are lined with decorations installed temporarily on
municipal lightpoles. That can be done with permission in a way
that enforcing laws against vandalism of the decorations as crimes
doesn't violate equal protection of the right to free speech.
 
I'm going to continue to disagree. This is a matter of government
restrictions on free speech. The mural, an act of expression, is
the free speech of the artists who painted it. They had permission.
However, as it was painted on a driving surface of an open roadway
in the public way, that permission cannot possibly prohibit someone
else from driving over it, even if the way it was driven over
defaced the mural.
 
Free speech in the public way is a natural right, not a privilege
that the city of Spokane may selectively grant to the artists
precluding the free speech of those who disagree. It's also a civil
right in the Constitution of the United States. Therefore, the
criminal charges are a denial of equal protection of a civil right.
 
As a secondary matter, a mural painted on a driving surface in the
public way IS NOT a painted marking as a traffic control device
based on the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, a standard
published by FHwA as promulgated by AASHTO. Now, it doesn't have
the force of law and I'm not sure of its status as a federal
regulation (to the extent that the standard is adopted in a given
state, it is a state regulation that local public works departments
must implement), but it's always a defense to  citation of a
traffic violation that signs and markings were knocked over,
misplaced, installed incorrectly, or worn out that the driver had
no notice of the condition being enforced.
 
Similarly, the boys should be able to use the fact of the
nonstandard pavement marking as a defense against the felony charge.
 
All I saw in the video were traffic violations that would have been
proper charges, not crimes to be charged.
 

Wouldn't it be a deliberate act of vandalism, though?

If the teenagers, in their statements to the police, admit to wanting to
deface the mural/flag in some way, sure. I don't think it's reasonable
to just assume that was their intent though unless you can find
evidence that they wanted to mess with the mural, perhaps via social
media conversations or emails. It seems entirely possible to me that
they were just "exploring": noticing that the paint on the road gave it
an interesting feel and wondering what it did to their traction.  We
used to enjoy going out in winter and finding slippery patches -
usually in parking lots, not on public streets - and then trying to do
doughnuts just because that felt like fun. I don't see why anyone
should attribute malice to these boys by default: they may just have
been having fun.

--
Rhino