Re: Jewish Journalist Arrested for Objecting to Islamic Terror Symbol in Grocery Store

On Mar 7, 2025 at 12:41:30 PM PST, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

On 3/7/2025 3:16 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

 On Mar 7, 2025 at 12:04:04 PM PST, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
 

 On 3/6/2025 2:49 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

  
 
https://rairfoundation.com/jewish-journalist-sloan-rachmuth-arrested-objecting-islamic-terror/

 
 Arrested for 'cyberstalking', not  "objecting".

 
 Which is much a bullshit charge as objecting, as was explained in the
original
 post**, and why the district attorney immediately shit-canned the case
because
 she knew the arrest both failed to meet the elements of the crime charged
and
 flagrantly violated the 1st Amendment.
 
 
 **North Carolina's cyberstalking statute, G.S. 14-196.3, requires repeated
 electronic communications made to a person with the intent to "annoy,
 threaten, or harass" an individual.
 
 --Rachmuth made a single post (no repetition as the statute requires).
 
 --Rachmuth's post was not directed *at* the employee as the statute
requires.
 It was *about* the employee but not sent *to* the employee in any way.
 
 Furthermore, State v. Bishop (2016) and State v. Shackelford (2019) have
 reinforced the principle that vague and overly-broad interpretations of
 cyber-stalking statutes violate constitutional protections of free speech
and
 press freedom.

 
Arresting her for "objecting" would violate her free-speech rights.

Arresting her for cyber-stalking also violated her free speech rights.

Had "objecting" been her offense, she'd have been guilty at the store.

She wasn't guilty of anything regardless of your grammatical nit-picking. What
she did wasn't legally actionable under either North Carolina law or the
United States Constitution.