The Brett Kimberlin Saga:

Follow this link to my BLOCKBUSTER STORY of how Brett Kimberlin, a convicted terrorist and perjurer, attempted to frame me for a crime, and then got me arrested for blogging when I exposed that misconduct to the world. That sounds like an incredible claim, but I provide primary documents and video evidence proving that he did this. And if you are moved by this story to provide a little help to myself and other victims of Mr. Kimberlin’s intimidation, such as Robert Stacy McCain, you can donate at the PayPal buttons on the right. And I thank everyone who has done so, and will do so.

Monday, November 10, 2014

Mother Jones Race Baits While Ignoring the Facts

So let’s imagine two different scenarios:

Scenario 1: A SWAT team decided to do a raid on John Smith’s house because they believe he has drugs.  In the early hours, they break down his door, they do not announce they are cops and Smith ends up shooting one of them.  The case is sent to the grand jury on possible murder charges, but they refuse to return an indictment.

Scenario 2: A SWAT team decided to do a raid on Mike Roe’s house because they believe he has drugs.  In the early hours, they break down his door, they announce they are cops and Roe ends up shooting one of them.  The case is sent to the grand jury on possible murder charges, and they indict him, and a trial is pending.

So why do you think we had this different outcomes?  Similar case, but one doesn’t even get an indictment, and the other does?  Why do you think that is?

If you said it obviously because of racism, you are Shane Bauer of Mother Jones:


That links to an article at MotherJones that starts with this picture...

Marvin Guy.                                       Henry Magee

...and tells this story:

Two SWAT Raids. Two Officers Dead. One Defendant Is Black, One White. Guess What Happened.

The two cases in Texas, just 100 miles from each other, raise troubling questions about race and "no-knock" police raids.

—By Shane Bauer | Tue Oct. 21, 2014 5:25 PM EDT

One Friday last May, the sun had not yet risen when a SWAT team ignited a flash-bang grenade outside Marvin Guy's apartment in Killeen, Texas. Officers were trying to climb in through a window when Guy, who had a criminal record and was suspected of possessing cocaine, opened fire. Four officers were hit; one of them was killed.

Five months earlier, 100 miles away, a SWAT officer was shot during a predawn no-knock raid on another house. In that case, too, police threw a flash-bang grenade and tried to enter the residence. Henry "Hank" Magee, according to his attorney, grabbed his gun to protect himself and his pregnant girlfriend. "As soon as the door was kicked in, he shot at the people coming through the door," says his attorney, Dick DeGuerin. With his legally owned semi-automatic .308 rifle, Magee killed one of the officers.

The cases are remarkably similar, except for one thing: Guy is black, Magee white. And while Magee was found to have acted in self-defense, prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for Guy. He remains in jail while he awaits trial.

It goes on, and I guess you should read the whole thing just so you know what they do and don’t say: that in the Magee case they didn’t announce their presence, and in the Guy case, they allegedly did.


Deputy Adam Sowders filed for a search warrant, and requested to enter Magee's home without knocking or announcing law enforcement's presence.

And indeed the Mother Jones article mentions that Magee shot “at unannounced intruders before dawn.”


Guy told an investigator that “he shot at a number of persons outside of his residence before he was taken into custody” an arrest affidavit said.

The affidavit said the officers announced that they were police as they tried to gain entry to Guy’s apartment.

And that seems like a significant difference, no?  It is the difference between maybe not being sure who you are shooting at—all you know is someone is breaking in—and (allegedly) knowing you are shooting at a cop.

And at first, I assumed Mr. Bauer didn’t know that this was the case.  But as he revealed, he knew and he felt he didn’t need to tell his readers this.  First, his race-baiting tweet:


My reply:


He didn’t respond to this one, but he did respond to this tweet:


His reply:


The exchange goes on:



Well, that was slightly inaccurate on my part.  He does say they didn’t announce for Magee toward the end of his piece.  But he didn’t say that they claimed they did with Guy.  And the narrative first paragraph...

One Friday last May, the sun had not yet risen when a SWAT team ignited a flash-bang grenade outside Marvin Guy's apartment in Killeen, Texas. Officers were trying to climb in through a window when Guy, who had a criminal record and was suspected of possessing cocaine, opened fire. Four officers were hit; one of them was killed.

...implies by omission that they did not.  Seriously, shouldn’t that paragraph read something more like this?


One Friday last May, the sun had not yet risen when a SWAT team ignited a flash-bang grenade outside Marvin Guy's apartment in Killeen, Texas. At some point they allegedly announced their presence.  Officers were trying to climb in through a window when Guy, who had a criminal record and was suspected of possessing cocaine, opened fire. Four officers were hit; one of them was killed.

Moving on, I shared with him the links I just shared with you:


And first he dodged:



But I noticed something about that dodge:


His defense?  “I didn’t say they didn’t, so it’s totally cool!”  Really:




In case you don’t know, “amirite” is slang for “Am I right?”  I find it is usually used sarcastically.  I certainly use it that way.

But he comes up with an even better excuse:


Which didn’t really wash with me:


Recall that he wrote that “[t]he cases are remarkably similar, except for one thing: Guy is black, Magee white.”  This implies very heavily that there is no other relevant difference.

Now, let’s point out a few other things.  First, Magee may very well have been guilty and got away with it.  And Guy might very well be innocent.  Guy hasn’t even been convicted.  Prosecutiors just cleared the first hurdle to successful prosecution: they found there was probable cause for a trial.  But as the facts are developed he might be actually innocent.  For instance, did he hear the cops announce?  Or maybe they are even lying about it?  I don’t have prejudice against cops, but I don’t assume they are always telling the truth, either.  Or maybe there were a series of break ins in the neighborhood where the criminals falsely pretended to be cops and he thought that was happening.  Guy remains innocent until proven guilty and that means that we can’t assume that 1) the cops did announce, 2) Guy heard it, and 3) he believed it.

And it is worth remembering that all they have done in that case is find probable cause.  That is a very low standard.  I tend to think that a prosecutor shouldn’t even begin the process unless he/she believes that the guy is guilty, but not all prosecutors follow that ideal.  Many positively believe we should try everyone who might be guilty and let the juries sort it out.  So we are talking a potentially very low threshold to get us where Guy is, and really we have no way of knowing how likely he is to be convicted, let alone receive the death penalty.  What we do know is that there is a massive difference in the evidence presented: in Magee’s case they definitely didn’t announce, in the Guy case they allegedly did.  Even if that evidence falls apart in the crucible of trial, it makes sense that they found probable cause in the Guy case.

And you might rationally wonder about the wisdom of no-knock and/or no-knock/no-announcement raids.  When I was famously SWATted, the cops still knocked on the door, twice.  Now, it wouldn’t surprise me if they had already guessed that the person falsely claiming to be me and claiming I murdered my wife was an imposter.  I mean just how many confessions do they get on 9-11?  And, you haven’t heard it, but in my opinion the acting on that call was simply terrible.  If I was the operator, I would have smelled “prank” and so maybe they did, too.  But on the other hand, when drugs are the issue, toilets can be flushed quickly, so at least not knocking might make sense in some cases.  But no-knock, and especially no-announcement raids, can be very dangerous, both for the police and for the people being raided.

So all of that is up in the air and a topic of reasonable discussion.  But what is clear is that Shane Bauer and Mother Jones committed journalistic malpractice, in this case, in order to inflame racial tensions.  And for that, they should be ashamed.

---------------------------------------

My wife and I have lost our jobs due to the harassment of convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin, including an attempt to get us killed and to frame me for a crime carrying a sentence of up to ten years.  I know that claim sounds fantastic, but if you read starting here, you will see absolute proof of these claims using documentary and video evidence.  If you would like to help in the fight to hold Mr. Kimberlin accountable, please hit the donation link on the right.  And thank you.

Follow me at Twitter @aaronworthing, mostly for snark and site updates.  And you can purchase my book (or borrow it for free if you have Amazon Prime), Archangel: A Novel of Alternate, Recent History here.  And you can read a little more about my novel, here.

---------------------------------------

Disclaimer:

I have accused some people, particularly Brett Kimberlin, of reprehensible conduct.  In some cases, the conduct is even criminal.  In all cases, the only justice I want is through the appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system.  I do not want to see vigilante violence against any person or any threat of such violence.  This kind of conduct is not only morally wrong, but it is counter-productive.

In the particular case of Brett Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him.  Do not call him.  Do not write him a letter.  Do not write him an email.  Do not text-message him.  Do not engage in any kind of directed communication.  I say this in part because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want that to happen to him.

And for that matter, don’t go on his property.  Don’t sneak around and try to photograph him.  Frankly try not to even be within his field of vision.  Your behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to mention trespass and other concerns).

And do not contact his organizations, either.  And most of all, leave his family alone.

The only exception to all that is that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might report.  And even then if he tells you to stop contacting him, obey that request.  That this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that a person asks you to stop and you refuse.


And let me say something else.  In my heart of hearts, I don’t believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above.  But if any of you have, stop it, and if you haven’t don’t start.

1 comment: