Chicago PD Searching for Man Who Yelled ‘All of You Should be Killed’ at Jewish Students
Chicago has seen many anti-Semitic crimes these past two months.
The Chicago Police Department is searching for a man who allegedly yelled “all of you should be killed” to a Jewish teacher and her students at the Yeshivas Tiferes Tzvi Academy on January 13.
The police described the man: “Black man, 40 to 49 years old, 6 feet tall, with black hair, mustache and beard, wearing a dark knit cap, black coat, white hooded sweater and dark pants.”
West Ridge is a neighborhood on the North Side of Chicago. It is one of a few neighborhoods that have seen many anti-Semitic attacks this year alone.
The Chicago PD arrested Shahid Hussein, 39, for an anti-Semitic crime spree. They accused him of spray-painting yellow swastikas on a synagogue and at a Jewish high school. He smashed windows at other synagogues and made “threatening gestures.” From The Chicago Sun-Times:
The swastikas were discovered Sunday on a wall of the F.R.E.E. Synagogue at 2935 W. Devon Ave. and on a shipping container used by the Hanna Sacks Bais Yaakov High School at 3021 W. Devon Ave., according to police.
Hussain is also accused of shattering a glass door and cracking another at a synagogue several blocks away, in the 2800 block of West North Shore, police said.
He also allegedly kicked in a side window at a synagogue in the 3600 block of West Devon, where two teens in a dormitory saw Hussain wearing a cape and a red hat as he yelled about “Jews” while breaking lights, according to Assistant State’s Attorney James Murphy.
A different witness described the cape Hussain was wearing as having a yellow swastika on it, Murphy said.
Hussain was seen on video miming with his hands as if he was racking and firing a shotgun as he walked around the building, Murphy said.
The police are still looking for a suspect who broke a window at Tel-Aviv Bakery. They are investigating accusations against several men for accosting a man at the Bnei Ruven synagogue:
The 35-year-old man at 6:55 a.m. Tuesday was outside in the 6300 block of North Whipple Street when three people in a silver sedan approached him, according to Chicago police. One person got out of the car and verbally threatened the 35-year-old man, police said. As the trio was leaving the area, they crashed into a parked car, damaging a window of that vehicle, police said.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
So we’re arresting people for offensive speech with no corresponding crime now?
God help us.
Reading the whole article would do you a lot of good here.
Would it? There is no hint in the article, or in either of the linked items, to indicate that this person has committed a crime. So why are the police looking for him? What will they do if they find him, if they can’t arrest him? Give him a stern talking-to?! I don’t understand this.
The other two criminals in the story obviously do need to be arrested; one has been, hopefully the other one will be soon.
Maybe I should be clearer
Reading the article AND knowing the definition of simple assault would do BOTH of you a lot of good here.
You’ll notice the word “arrest” never appears in the police link or in the article associated with this person. It actually clarifies that police are “looking to identify” him. That pretty much means charge him with a misdemeanor of simple assault.
But he didn’t commit assault, or any other crime. Saying that someone ought to be killed is not a crime. It’s protected speech, so it can’t be a crime.
I think Milhouse is absolutely right here. I saw nothing in the reports that he was violent or threatened violence against any individual. There is not carve out in the 1st Amendment for Ignorant Anti-Semites.
Keep in mind that the rest of us are not as intellectual as you. Sorry we are trying your patience. Even though the article and police report don’t mention “arrest”, in order to charge him with a misdemeanor, wouldn’t they have to arrest him?
1. The link to the police announcement literally says “Assault” at the top, that’s for a reason. You can say that semantically it isn’t a threat, when in fact it is up for the legal system to decide whether it’s a threat or not. It’s clearly an implied threat to me and to LEOs in that area.
2. Simple assault can be done with threatening words. Look up the definition…make sure you understand the difference between simple (typically a misdemeanor) and aggravated (typically a felony)
3. No, misdemeanors do not necessarily mean arrest is necessary.
Here’s the link for those of you who didn’t see it embedded in the text.
The article is slightly misleading in its segue from the man screaming his obscenities to Chicago PD arresting Shahid Hussein for destruction of private property. If you read it fast it seemly to imply that Mr. Hussein is the same person screaming those obscenities.
And maybe the word “arrest” does in fact not appear in the article, and maybe the police are indeed “looking to identify him”. But for what? What “simple assault” took place? Did they have the goods on him for some prior transgression? If not, there’s no crime here, just some feelings hurt.
And by the way, I am Jewish too, but I realize that when we start “searching” for such people, we are diverting resources from the pursuit of people who actually HAVE committed real crimes. But then again, in today’s Cook County under the admirable leadership of state’s attorney Kim Foxx, that’s not a priority anyway.
Healthguy, you are wrong. There is no possible way to characterize this as an assault, or as a threat. “Someone ought to kill you” is not a threat at all. Not just semantically, but legally.
As I’m sure you know, it is a federal crime to threaten the president (on top of the state crime to threaten anyone). And yet it is black letter law that expressing a wish and hope that someone should kill the president is 100% protected speech, and the government may not do anything to even discourage such expression. It is “mere advocacy”, and advocacy — of anything at all — gets the highest level of protection.
Nor can it be assault. Even “I will kill you”, which is a threat, and thus not protected and a crime, is not assault. The definition of assault is putting someone in reasonable fear of imminent physical harm. That word “imminent” is absolutely key, and without it there is no assault. Unless those Jews feared that this maniac was about to kill them right there and then, and that fear was objectively reasonable, he did not assault them.
And how can they charge him without arresting him?
At this point you are arguing against a police website. Have at it.
Vandalism or aggravated criminal behavior for shattering the glass? Threatening behavior causing someone to be in fear for their safety? (Assault)? Maybe we should nip this type of activity in the bud if we can find the perp….
This is the neighborhood I grew up in..maybe I am being over-protective……. NAH.
What glass? He didn’t break any glass, he merely informed some people of his opinion that they ought to be killed. That’s protected speech. It’s not a threat, it’s not incitement, it doesn’t fall under any of the other recognized exceptions to the first amendment. So we can’t do anything about it, and even for the police to be looking for him seems like a breach of his civil liberties, because it’s inherently threatening and will thus have a chilling effect on the protected speech of others who think as he does, or who have similarly unpopular opinions.
You’re conflating two different guys.
You’re getting two different police reports about two different perpetrators mixed up. I think that’s kind of what mobs do.
The linked info refers to “threats”. The only specific thing that is reported is that the guy said “all of you should be killed”. Opinions could differ on whether that is a criminal threat, but the article DOESN’T say that was the only thing he said. You would have to suppose he also said something else, since “threats” is a plural.
Reasonable opinions cannot differ on whether that is a threat. It is clearly not, and anyone who claims it is merely displays his ignorance. And if he had made any actual threats they would have been in the police report and the news story. Their absence is proof positive that they don’t exist.
He didn’t commit a crime. It wasn’t a nice thing to say but it isn’t a crime. WTF?
Obviously a member of Proud Boys.
Obviously. Probably wearing blackface, the scoundrel.
He uses Justin Trudeau’s cosmetician.
Here we are. And we’re here for one reason: liberal Jews.
There is no greater existential threat to world Jewry than liberal Jews.
Not liberal Jews alone; they are but a subset of White Liberals. You know the ones, people who are so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Liberal Jews have always led the liberalism movement. As a Jew, they embarrass me and they threaten my safety and my way of life not just becuse of the insane policies they come up with and the lunatics they enable, but because they cause people to hate Jews.
You don’t have to look further than Soros.
Check out the hate they cause:
“Liberal Jews have always led the liberalism movement.”
This is not true, and borders on antisemitism. “Liberalism” did fine before Jews got involved, and would do fine without its Jewish members. Jews have not “always led” it. Jews have always been prominent in all intellectual movements, both left and right (except those few that wouldn’t have them); “liberalism” is not unique in this. But there are few movements of any size that Jews can be said to “lead”, let alone to have “always led”. Objectivism; I can’t think of any others. Soros is certainly not a “leader” of “liberalism”; he’s very much a follower, and not even a particularly prominent one. He operates in the shadows, funding others, not leading.
And none of this can in any way justify or excuse the antisemitism at Ron Unz’s site. You sound exactly like the original Nazis and the Russian Whites and Ukranians of their era, who excused their antisemitism by blaming communism on the Jews. They were wrong and so are you.
I want to give you more than the one up-tick I can.
I agree. But, it sure seems that the liberal establishment is turning on Jewish members as part of their Pro-Arab, Pro Nation of Israel move. They are starting with the more Observant Jews and moving down the line. Although, they may allow the Anti-Zionist Jews to remain.
I guess this is the Black Face of White Supremacy the progs keep prattling on about?
If Leonard Bernstein was alive, he’d invite the guy to dinner.
Seems like he’s a member of the privileged class.
At least it isn’t NY where he would be released anyway so there wouldn’t be a point to arresting him.
Good thing these aren’t white people doing this, otherwise it would clearly be domestic terrorism.
Did he also yell that chicago was biden country?
Wow, another well-tanned, Jew-hating, Dhimmi-crat “white supremacist.”
I never realized the CRT propaganda that makes them hate Jews and Asians was all due to Muslims, particularly because these resentment based hate attacks on Jews and Asians predate there being a Muslim population in this country.
Do you have anything of value to say ever or is it always try to tie Muslims to it no matter how irrelevant they are to the story?
Further proof Goodman and Schwerner should have stayed home.
Does this TWIT include all the BLACK JEWS in afreaka ALSO. I know MANY people that would say that about his RACE of SIMPLISTIC….MORONS! HERE is what I have say to him and HIS LOT…..PPPFFFFFTTT!
The man is probably a product of Jackson, Sharpton and Farrakhan. Sad how things changed between the Jews and Blacks after King was assassinated. King had the blacks and Jews working together but that all ended when Jackson, Sharpton and Farrakhan became so called leaders for the black community….
Ultimately a product of George Soros, and his organ grinder monkey, Barrack. The damage done to our society by these germs dwarfs anything the ChiComms could release from a lab. But then, the ChiComms have decimated our leadership with bribery.
Even in Deep Blue Chicago I doubt that too many of the parents of the students in that school voted for Biden
Indeed. Given the sort of school it is, I would bet fewer than 15% of the parents voted for Biden.
135% voted for Biden.
Unless those parents are voting machines. “They” just might be.