3 ms·
His possession of firearms was legal, and the judge tossed that charge. They didn't come to his home because they suspected an illegally possessed firearm. It
by miek 8y ago
His possession of firearms was legal, and the judge tossed that charge. They didn't come to his home because they suspected an illegally possessed firearm. It certainly appears that they came on a fishing expedition because he was "identified" as a threat. The FBI admitted a lack of any direct threat.
- thinkcontext 8y ago> They didn't come to his home because they suspected an illegally possessed firearm. I was curious about this as well, the Foreign Policy article has more detail: "In his affidavit, Keighley describes learning that Daniels placed a firearm in his checked luggage — in compliance with airline regulations, according to the defense — which was then delayed, before being returned to his home address in Dallas. The FBI obtained a search warrant on Dec. 7, based on Daniels’s prior conviction, and the raid took place five days later." http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/30/is-a-court-case-in-texas-the-first-prosecution-of-a-black-identity-extremist/ http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/30/is-a-court-case-in-texas... This indicates the warrant was indeed for illegal possession.
- miek 8y agoInteresting, nice find and thanks- I was curious as well. I guess the warrant was wrongly issued and pursued then, given that the judge tossed that charge out. If that is the case, it really seems to boil down to intimidation.