Boston Hoaxers Unapologetic In Press Conference (Video)

Commenters have been saying they should be locked up just on the basis of this "too bad, we Punk'd the whole city" non-apology.

Of course the left is going ga-ga for them, as these cutting edge guerilla pranksters showed just how uptight and paranoid we are about this whole "terrorism" scam.

Like this asshole:

A follow up to yesterday's "Aqua Teen Hunger Force LED art shuts down Boston" coverage - Two of the artists who put magnetic lights up as part of an ad campaign were arrested, based on the city's current "post 9-11" stance it's likely they will each get the death penalty, or perhaps worse.

CNN sent me an email and I talked to them briefly - a few blinky magnetic signs aren't "hoax devices" and unfortunately what was demonstrated is best summed up by a MAKE reader "...anyone can cripple a city with little or no expense. Real bomb not even needed. All that's necessary is pathetic paranoia."

Hmmm... pathetic paranoia, you say?

Where have I heard that before?

I'm so glad the fascist Muslim jihadis and the "progressive" left are now working off the same talking-points dispatches. Should save them a bundle on printing costs.

Overcharged: As much as I'd like them to do 30 or 60 days in jail for the small-bore crimes they did commit, I'm as skeptical as the judge they were arraigned before about the prosecutor's overcharging:

The two men smiled broadly throughout much of the brief proceeding as Assistant Attorney General John Grossman described the battery-powered characters as "bomb-like devices." The men, Peter Berdovsky, 27, and Sean Stevens, 28, face charges of placing a hoax device in a way that causes panic and disorderly conduct.

...

Judge Paul K. Leary seemed skeptical of the state's case, telling Grossman that the law requires that people must intend to create a panic to be charged with placing hoax devices.

You can't prove intent from resut. Yes, the result was to cause a "panic" (though I'm not sure it was a panic), but it is doubtful in the extreme that was their intent. Even if they had some resin-clogged notion about that -- "Wouldn't it be great if people just wigged out when they saw these?" -- it could never be proven.

Nonetheless, it seems pretty incontrovertible they committed a raft of minor crimes -- trespass, disorderly conduct, whatever other penny-ante stuff you can get them on -- and that, being guilty of those crimes, they should pay a penalty for them.

Sure, prosecutors have discretion in cases. Most of the time such things won't be prosecuted. But that's the point of discretion. You may not be prosecuted for setting off fireworks without a permit, but if you accidentally shoot them into a crowd a blind a child, trust me, you'e going to be charged.

You can't overcharge for crimes that a criminal didn't intend, but, should havoc ensue because of his crimes, you sure can charge and prosecute for the crimes he definitely did commit.

posted by Ace at 05:16 PM