Student Accused of Trying to Chain College Republicans in Classroom Won’t Face Charges
“Since we are unable to say what he intended to accomplish beyond a reasonable doubt, we decline to file a criminal charge”
In early June, College Republicans at the University of Washington were meeting in a classroom, when a left wing student approached from the outside and tried to chain the doors shut. He was caught shortly after, and we’re now learning he won’t face charges.
Jason Rantz of KTTH Radio described the incident in June:
Rantz: ‘Antifa’ member arrested for trying to imprison Republican students in classroom
An alleged member of a local antifa group was arrested Monday evening for attempting — and very badly failing — to chain the doors, locking conservative students in a University of Washington classroom.
Front. The meeting caught the attention of Emerald City Antifa. On their Facebook page, the group encouraged members to show up to disrupt the event.
One person did show up, though it’s unclear if he’s directly connected with the Facebook page. But he didn’t try to simply disrupt the event; he tried to lock the students in the hall with a chain and lock.
“I saw a guy in black approach the door but there had been no protest outside or anything so antifa wasn’t necessarily on my radar,” UWCR member Zach Wildfang told The Jason Rantz Show on KTTH. “He crouched down and immediately slapped his chain around the door.”
Here’s a video of the incident:
There won’t be any charges for that.
Celine Ryan reports at Campus Reform:
Alleged ‘Antifa’ member who disrupted College Republicans meeting will NOT face charges (UPDATE)
The King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office told Campus Reform that the individual arrested after police say he attempted to chain lock a door of the room in which College Republicans were meeting will not be charged with any crime.
“We are declining to prosecute…because, based on the facts presented, it is unlikely that we would be able to prove he intentionally committed the crime of disorderly conduct beyond a reasonable doubt…While we can speculate, the purpose of the suspect’s use of the chain is not entirely clear since there were other doorways/exits in the class that were visible and obvious,” the prosecuting attorney’s office said.
“Furthermore, the meeting itself was not in any way disrupted except to the extent necessary to immediately interrupt, chase and apprehend the suspect. While it is fair to say that the suspect had formed some plan, it is not at all clear from his actions what that plan was. The plan was fully and completely interrupted from the very moment it began,” the prosecuting attorney’s statement added.
“Since we are unable to say what he intended to accomplish beyond a reasonable doubt, we decline to file a criminal charge.”
When behavior like this goes unpunished, it only encourages more.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Trump needs to follow through on designating Antifas as a terrorist organization. That likely would not help with a hard left, Antifas-sympathizing law agency, but it would open the door to federal prosecution. If Antifas members were publicly identified on some sort of federal list, they could be punished in all sorts of ways, like exclusion from federal student aid programs and federal jobs.
Fire codes? We doan need no steekin’ fire codes!
So, the prosecutor thinks that his lawyer could successfully raise reasonable doubt that he knew he was confining people in the room?
That makes no sense at all. It’s more likely they saw the case as a political hot potato they didn’t want. Cowards!
more likely the prosecutor approves of what the guy did. it is how a communist justice system works.
He wasn’t confining people in the room. “There were other doorways/exits in the class that were visible and obvious.” Hence the mystery about exactly what he thought he was doing.
I think what is lost here –
This man and antfa are organizations of the state, supported and controlled by the left.
The only prosecutions that will occur are the ones that must be done to keep from being exposed as the sole owners of the group.
Do they want vigilantes? Because this is how you get vigilantes.
Yep. Should have taken the chain from the sniveling little bitch and whipped him with it at the time.
Guaranteed the DA would have prosecuted that as a hate crime, and assault.
That’s why you need to take a cue from antifa and wear a mask when you do it.
You know, there’s a funny thing about those laws: in Charlottesville, the “alt-right” operating under a legally issued permit was carefully checked by Charlottesville PD and VA State police. Anything even resembling a mask was confiscated because VA has an anti-mask law dating back to the 1960s.
Antifa showed up without a permit and masked every one. The same two “law enforcement” groups waved them on in — with masks.
Laws are just “a scrap of paper”, to quote von Ribbentrop, without equal enforcement — which the Constitution is supposed to require. Not when Democrats are in charge.
Just invite the fellow to a blanket party – over the head and pelt liberally with sticks, fists, etc.
A group needs to dress up as ANTIFA, visit and beat the tar out of him. Maybe brand his forehead “ANTIFA”? That would be a great way to plant fear and distrust in the group.
I believe that Antifa will quickly demonstrate that they are a bunch of chicken shits only when they are being hurt.
That is what I fear. They (the Left) seems to WANT a breakdown of law and order. The problem is that thus far, most people that are NOT them don’t really care; we kind of have a “this is dumb, but they will grow out of it” or “I’m too busy with what I love to care about your crazy” mentality.
And it emboldens them cuz we don’t fight back. But there will come a breaking point, and we WILL fight back – because we care about our families and our freedoms and our safety.
And then the law and order WILL break down like they want, and I do not think that we will be able to fully come back from that place, even after we win. And maybe that is also why we mostly ignore the issue, hoping that they will come to see reason.
Or we recognize that law enforcement and the courts ignore the provocations of the left and go after the right for what amounts to self-defense.
This.
Many exit doors are locked in places like this…. Just because there was a door, doesn’t mean it could be exited.
This is more favoritism to the violent left. And that poor reporter that pulled a gun on people about to attack him, he’s in jail. He’d suffered broken bones by people like that before, but he was the bad guy?
We have a serious 4th-rate citizenship problem here.
LAW-ITIS!!!
RCW 9A.84.030
Disorderly conduct.
(1) A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if the person:
(a) Uses abusive language and thereby intentionally creates a risk of assault;
(b) Intentionally disrupts any lawful assembly or meeting of persons without lawful authority;
(c) Intentionally obstructs vehicular or pedestrian traffic without lawful authority; or
(d)(i) Intentionally engages in fighting or in tumultuous conduct or makes unreasonable noise, within five hundred feet of:
(A) The location where a funeral or burial is being performed;
(B) A funeral home during the viewing of a deceased person;
(C) A funeral procession, if the person described in this subsection (1)(d) knows that the funeral procession is taking place; or
(D) A building in which a funeral or memorial service is being conducted; and
(ii) Knows that the activity adversely affects the funeral, burial, viewing, funeral procession, or memorial service.
(2) Disorderly conduct is a misdemeanor.
The above is the relevant state statute. Here is the relevant Seattle municipal code:
Chapter 12A.12 – OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER
12A.12.010 – Disorderly conduct.
A. A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if he or she intentionally, maliciously and unreasonably disrupts any assembly or meeting of persons and refuses or intentionally fails to cease such activity when ordered to do so by a police officer or by a person in charge of the assembly or meeting.
B. The following definition applies in this section: “Malice” or “maliciously” shall impart an evil intent, wish or design to vex, annoy, or injure another person. Malice may be inferred from an act done in willful disregard of the rights of another, or an act wrongfully done without just cause or excuse, or an act or omission of duty betraying a willful disregard of social duty. Malicious intent shall not be construed to mean the exercise of one’s constitutional rights to picket, or to legally protest.
The county prosecutor prosecutes state crimes in county superior court. Trying to chain a meeting room door closed constitutes clear attempt to “Intentionally disrupts any lawful assembly or meeting of persons without lawful authority”. I can’t think of a credible defense to such behavior.
The city attorney prosecutes city crimes in municipal court. Was the city attorney not asked to prosecute? Seattle is in firm control of the Left, so is hopelessly corrupt. But, trying to chain a meeting room door closed from the outside is obviously a malicious and unreasonable act. I suppose the perp can argue that he ceased his effort when ordered to by a cop.
Those in charge of the meeting need to regroup and refile their complaint, with both the city and county.
I’m in WA, BT. I approached local and county police with city and county ordinances in hand concerning a chronic problem that affects me and found their officers to be more concerned with politics and optics than with law enforcement. Letters to local and county boards went unanswered.
Seattle is lost. My old hometown 30 miles out is no longer a rural farm/dairy town, but an overgrown suburb. The only time I head over to that side of the pond is for the airport. As they retire and move to the peninsula, or swarm us in summer for vacation, they bring their liberal disease with them though it’s more dilute here. Still they’ve tipped the scales so we’re giving serious thought to selling and moving to flyover country.
The issue with disorderly conduct may be the lack of actual disruption.
However, if it can be shown that locking persons in a room is restraining them, this could be an attempted unlawful imprisonment, which would involve RCW 9A.40.040 and RCW 9A.28.020.
No matter, there must be some accountability, and the fact there is none sends a bad message.
Why, I could hope for another galloping gertie (1940) and floating bridge sinking (1979).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3xU93SG4fQ
Well I would say (b) definitely applies in this instance. It’s a shame this guy isn’t being prosecuted but like the article says: Prosecutors didn’t think they had a strong enough case to convict. I think they backed off because if they had tried to prosecute him and lost, given the media attention, it would have been a real embarrassment for them.
Strong enough case? He’s photographed in the process of violating city laws. He should have been in front of a city judge the next morning at 7AM being asked, “How do you plead?” with the unspoken understanding that the word “Guilty” involves a thousand dollar fine and no jail time, while “Not guilty” involves going back to jail until a bail hearing can be arranged, probably something in the ten thousand dollar range, thousands of dollars worth of legal fees, more jail time, and most likely a 30 day jail term at the end and a ten thousand dollar “Don’t waste our time” fine.
Another police fail. Last I checked, having a motive or intention is not a requirement for making an arrest or filing a charge, only proof beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is indeed guilty, and the motive/intention is only necessary in sentencing to determine the degree of punishment. Can you identify the alleged perpetrator? Yes. Is there video proof of him attempting to chain the door with people inside … done. The accused has the only key? False imprisonment. There were X people in the room … X counts of false imprisonment. Does he have a record?
Anything less is a copout.
Without an intention to disrupt the meeting there is no crime. As the prosecutor said, it’s clear that he must have had some plan, but without knowing what it was how can you possibly prove beyond reasonable doubt that he committed a crime?
Why do I have this overwhelming feeling that had it been a College Republican chaining the doors shut on an Antifa meeting the student would have long since been fined, jailed and expelled from the school?
Because you have more than two brain cells functional?
Attempts don’t count? First we had Hillary excused because of no “intent” to have classified into on her server.
Rationalization is now a fixture in Leftist legal opinions.
This is a signal (intentional or not) of the judiciary being like minded to Antifa. Justice is now political. As noted above the only recourse is submission or reaction. The Left will brand the reaction as happening first.
One more incremental step on the road to serfdom or …
Intent is an element of the crime. Without it there is no crime. Chaining a door is not against the law.
In the end what stops this sort of thing is neither cops nor courts. What stops it is vigilante action against these people. Stern vigilante action. And after that….
And after that ….
More vigilantism, more stern than before!
The trouble with conservatives is they have a very high threshold before they blow. We need to lower that threshold several magnitudes.
Suppose that it had been a coven of Ilhans?
From Coventon?
Charges? How about curb stomping, or, a rifle butt across the face?
Yup, the enviable American justice system.
Remember the justice served for Hillary’s deleting 33,000 e-mails that were under a court ordered ‘Hold safe’ directive?
I dont either.
fucking pieces of shit. DA office as well as the antifa member.
yeah this post will prob be deleted for language. don’t care.
AntiFa, and similar groups are in for a rude awakening. Their violent attacks on ordinary citizens only work as long as the citizenry obeys the laws. See, just like criminal gangs, such as the Mafis and bootleggers during Prohibition, they are only successful when they violated the law and others do not. The danger with refusing to enforce the law, against the lawless ones, is that at some point the rest of the citizenry comes to the conclusion that law and order do not exist. At that point the citizenry, as individuals and groups will impose their own law and order on what remains of society. Then, society devolves into anarchy and civil war; which is exactly what groups like AntiFa want.
Now, while this could all be the plot of some overarching mastermind to cause enough civil unrest to justify draconian societal control measures, it is far more likely that those allowing AntiFa, and others, to run amuck are doing it for short-term personal gain.
Now for the rest of us, things like chains, especially chains in the hands of masked men, can be considered a weapon if displayed in a threatening manner. This means that deadly weapons can be used to defend against them.A couple of “greeters” sporting concealed, collapsible steel batons or even medical canes would have prevented this situation from happening in the first place. People need to adjust their thinking and develop situational awareness and defensive planning.
I think there is a real possibility that they are trying to push conservatives over the edge.
I’d advise conservatives simply to leave those places, along with their reason, capability and tax payments. Leave it to the loonies. As long as Trump is president, there won’t be federal bailouts for their self imposed problems.
The prosecutors let these people down. Time for the tax base to depart.
The problem there is that groups like AntiFa do not just attack Republicans or conservatives. They attack anyone and everyone, not wearing a black mask. We have seen them attack innocent people on the streets of Portland and Seattle. Why should law abiding people have to abandon their property and their life because of lunatic anarchists? If people do not stand up and demand that their government keep the peace, in their communities, then the people will find themselves providing their own security. Then things will get bloody.
Liberal/Progressives, like the Democrats, think they control AntiFa. But the don’t. AntiFa has its own goals and agenda and the Dems are getting played.
At their core antifa are anarchists. The Marxists are happy for them to create chaos for now, because it results in a vacuum that the Marxists think they can fill.
Disorderly conduct? I always thought locking people in a room against their will was, legally speaking, kidnapping.
But he didn’t do that.
Just because the system will not bring justice to bear does not mean that justice will not be served.
The creeper lives somewhere.
In another era, this would be an abortion… gas chamber, and it would be National Socialists securing the doors to prevent Jews from surviving the wicked… final solution.
So his defense is stupidity? Brilliant.
Sure. Since he failed to complete his part of the mission, the guys with the fire bombs decided not to deploy.
Holding people in a room against their will is kidnapping or false imprisonment, so, he should be charged.
But he didn’t do that, so he can’t be charged with it.
Chaining people in a room is “false imprisonment,” which is a crime on its own. Prosecutors don’t need to know what FURTHER crimes the perpetrator may have intended. That he intended the crime of false imprisonment is all they need to show.
And if they could show that they would have charged him with it. The problem is they can’t show that. It’s obvious that he intended something, but it’s anyone’s guess what.
That makes this another example of the states of Oregon and Washington colluding with Antifa to violently suppress the civil rights of their conservative minorities. Prosecute both states under the 1964-65 Civil Rights Acts.