• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Tennessee Man Who Plotted An Attack On A New York Mosque Won’t Face Terrorism Charges

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Loudninja

Member
A Tennessee man won't face terrorism charges for plotting an attack against an upstate New York mosque — and attorneys claim it's because federal terrorism statutes almost exclusively focus on foreign extremists.

Robert Doggart was arrested in April 2015 after authorities discovered that he had been trying to recruit people to burn down a mosque in "Islamberg," a self-named, predominantly Muslim community near Hancock, according to court records.

Doggart, 65, who ran for Congress as an Independent in 2014, allegedly went on right-wing online forums and openly talked about using AR-15 assault rifles to attack Muslims because he believed the small upstate community was an extremist training camp, records show. Authorities intercepted Doggart's alleged plot before anyone was hurt.

He's facing one count of solicitation to commit arson, one count of solicitation to commit a civil rights violation and two counts of threat in interstate commerce. But he's not facing any terrorism charges and has been on house arrest since his initial capture.
Click to expand...

From the Attorney against Robert Doggart:
Attorneys representing the Islamberg community in a seperate civil lawsuit claim a loophole in federal law allows defendants such as Doggart to escape terrorism charges.

"There's a gap in the law," attorney Tahirah Amatul-Wadud told the Daily News on Monday evening. "Frankly, there is nothing on terrorism unless it's connected to a foreign element. You won't see the KKK charged with domestic terror even though that's what they do."

According to the Patriot Act from 2001, prosecutors can only charge a defendant with domestic terrorism if he or she had the intension to "intimidate" or "coerce" a civilian population, or influence the "policy of a government" to affect the conduct of government by "mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping."

Contrastingly, Amatul-Wadud claimed, the requirements are less stringent for pursuing terrorism charges if the alleged act has a foreign element to it, for example ties to international terror networks such as ISIS or al-Qaeda.
Click to expand...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...ce-terror-charges-article-1.2971801?cid=bitly
 
F

FreedomFighter

Member
White people can't be terrorists here. He'd have to be Muslim for that.

EDIT: If a person is white and Muslim, then authorities/media will default to "terrorist". That's the only circumstance.
 
H

Haly

One day I realized that sadness is just another word for not enough coffee.
I didn't realize purely domestic terrorists were actually against the law. Jesus fuck.
 
S

Shaanyboi

Banned
I think he'd have to threaten people the state actually gives a shit about to get charged for terrorism.

What a fucking joke.
 
UberTag

UberTag

Member
With no plea bargain in play, I hope there are protests if this jury only finds Doggart guilty on some (but not all) of the 4 counts against him and sentences him to time served (from his house arrest) and nothing more.

For perspective, it's not like this guy would have been deemed a terrorist even if he had carried out his plan.
He would have been deemed a lone wolf gunman... with mental health issues (so there would be no blame on him having access to firearms, either).
 
G

Gordon Shumway

Banned
duckroll said:
Why would it be terrorism? He's just doing what the president wants right?
Click to expand...

post-28915-kristen-bell-laughing-crying-g-TzMP.gif


Mifune said:
This is disgusting and terrifying. The man is a terrorist.
Click to expand...

Probably has a Batman avatar..
 
O

Ocarina_117

Banned
White people are America's greatest terrorists.

Unfortunately they act in a way that pleases a vocal minority, including the president.
 
E

ElBoxyBrown

Banned
"Frankly, there is nothing on terrorism unless it's connected to a foreign element. You won't see the KKK charged with domestic terror even though that's what they do."
Click to expand...
So you just admitted they do commit terrorism but you won't call it terrorism.

Am I reading this BS statement right?

Edit: I'm reading the statement wrong. Never mind.
 
T

Trakdown

Member
"Frankly, there is nothing on terrorism unless it's connected to a foreign element. You won't see the KKK charged with domestic terror even though that's what they do."
Click to expand...

Oh good. So fuckers like Tim McVeigh would get better treatment nowadays just because he's a citizen. No wonder those gun toting miscreants in Oregon got off easy.

Nation of laws my ass.

EDIT: Oops, missed that's the lawyer. He's not wrong though, sadly.
 
K

Koomaster

Member
prosecutors can only charge a defendant with domestic terrorism if he or she had the intention to "intimidate" or "coerce" a civilian population
Click to expand...
So trying to recruit people to help him burn down a mosque and talking about using weapons on Muslims doesn't fall under tying to intimidate a civilian population... because...????

Seriously is it because that wasn't his 'intent'; he didn't want to intimidate them, he just wanted them dead so therefor not terrorism? Is that the rationale? I really want to know if that's it, because if so that's a pretty shitty interpretation of the law.
 
B

Boney

Banned
only charge a defendant with domestic terrorism if he or she had the intension to "intimidate" or "coerce" a civilian population, or influence the "policy of a government" to affect the conduct of government by "mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping."
Click to expand...

So charge him for terrorist activities? I don't get how he doesn't "qualify" as a terrorist act according to this.

i know, killing brown people is fine
 
B

Beckx

Member
Author Hari Kunzru accurately summarizes US terrorism laws as a nothing more than a sentencing multiplier for brown people.
 
G

grimmiq

Member
FreedomFighter said:
White people can't be terrorists here. He'd have to be Muslim for that.

EDIT: If a person is white and Muslim, then authorities/media will default to "terrorist". That's the only circumstance.
Click to expand...

If they're under 30 then they'll say they were obviously radicalized by muslim refugees and the muslim ban would protect their children, making the attacker out to be a victim.
 
A

Angelus Errare

Banned
Trakdown said:
Oh good. So fuckers like Tim McVeigh would get better treatment nowadays just because he's a citizen. No wonder those gun toting miscreants in Oregon got off easy.

Nation of laws my ass.

EDIT: Oops, missed that's the lawyer. He's not wrong though, sadly.
Click to expand...

I mean America was really patriotic with Oklahoma City Bombing and wanting to destroy the middle east until it was revealed that it was a white guy, then everyone forgot OKC Bombing; I've had people tell me "that happened so long ago"...

Which why it tilts me when I see so many Americans saying "Never forget 9/11" but forgot never even mention the terrorist attack that happened all of 6 years prior.
 
V

Vital Tundra

Member
You would think mending the laws to properly convict as terror would be an easy, and quick fix. Nope. Can't have white people being the primary problem for attacks committed on our own soil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Prolific swatter (17 yr old from CA) arrested in conjunction with hundreds of swatting offences
49
4K
DavidGzz replied
  • Locked
Taliban vs ISIS K continues suicide bomber kills 50 in suspected ISIS attack on Afghanistan mosque as the country descends further into chaos
1
761
chromhound replied
The man who owes Nintendo $14m: Gary Bowser and gaming’s most infamous piracy case
2
85
5K
SHA replied
Man yelled racial slurs before machete attack in Northern California
2
51
7K
akira28 replied
Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe: British woman jailed in Iran faces new charges
0
805
Audioboxer replied
Top Bottom