5 ms·

A lot of people in these Hacker News comments are accepting the framing that moving the zines is evidence tampering and therefore deserves a 30 year sentence. W

by Chinjut 3mo ago

A lot of people in these Hacker News comments are accepting the framing that moving the zines is evidence tampering and therefore deserves a 30 year sentence. What crime are zines evidence of?

bawolff 3mo ago
I don't think that is the relavent question. Did he move the items because he believed that they were evidence being sought by the police? I don't really care if they are actually evidence of something or not. I care if the accused believed they were and moved them for that purpose.
- vel0city 3mo ago
  Let's say someone is driving 35MPH. They think "oh snap, I think the speed limit is 30MPH here!". The posted speed limit is actually 40MPH. Was this person speeding or not? Should a cop ticket them for thinking they're doing something wrong, even if everything they were doing was legal? Did they even think the zines were implicated as evidence? Were the zines implicated as evidence? What crimes were being committed by ownership of these zines? If there's a warrant issued to search a house, and a resident of that house eats a ham sandwich for lunch while the cops are on their way, did they destroy evidence?
  - BobbyJo 3mo ago
    It's not illegal "because you think its illegal", it's illegal because "you had a court order to provide things that are relevant and you instead hid things you thought were relevant". If I hide someone who I think did a crime to help them escape police, I've now implicated myself in the crime, whether or not my trying to hide them actually caused them to get away with it.
    - vel0city 3mo ago
      > it's illegal because "you had a court order to provide things that are relevant and you instead hid things you thought were relevant" And yet when Trump does it with classified documents its not a problem. Where's his 30 years? Did he even have a warrant issued to him related to these documents? Are these zines even relevant evidence? Is everyone who has these magazines also now a criminal? What about other radical anti-government political pamphlets like Common Sense? > If I hide someone who I think did a crime to help them escape police Seems like quite a different thing than moving some political pamphlets. If they were shredding financial documents while being charged with financial crimes I'd agree. If they were hiding guns with a gun trafficking charge, I'd understand. Flushing drugs down the drain, sure. Moving political zines though? Really? What's the relevance again for the ownership of political pamphlets to committing crimes?
      - MichaelZuo 3mo ago
        If you knew it’s significantly different from your speeding example… why did you reply with such a misleading example in the first place?
        vel0city 3mo ago
        I mean its a very radically different thing in almost every way than what was originally proposed. The zines didn't commit any crimes. Let's say you hide someone who didn't actually commit a crime but you thought they did. Are you still guilty of hiding a suspect in the crime that wasn't a crime? The standard was: > I care if the accused believed they were and moved them for that purpose So to that poster what matters was that the zines being useful or not to the investigation was not relevant, it was if the person thought it was potentially relevant or not. The wife owning some zines is evidence of a crime? Really? Owning some zines is evidence of criminal activity these days?
      - BobbyJo 3mo ago
        > "but what about.." I don't know. > Did he even have a warrant issued to him related to these documents? Yes. A zine put together by a group that later goes on to commit a crime together, that promotes the ideologies underlying the crime, feels like the kind of thing a search warrant/subpoena would apply to. The fact that the person involved in the crime asked that they be hidden makes it pretty obvious that they saw it that way as well. > Are these zines even relevant evidence? Yes. > Is everyone who has these magazines also now a criminal? No. Things can be legal and evidence of ill intent at the same time. > What about other radical anti-government political pamphlets like Common Sense? If the editor(s) of that pamphlet went on to commit a crime of a political nature, no doubt their relationship with the pamphlet would be evidence used against them. It would also still be perfectly legal to have, and legal for others to continue publishing. > Seems like quite a different thing than moving some political pamphlets. It is, but I think the core idea of involving yourself in the crime by way of trying to hide evidence etc. is similar at least. > What's the relevance again for the ownership of political pamphlets to committing crimes? Depends on the crime. If they had robbed a Wendy's, probably no relevance. If they attacked an ICE building and the pamphlets established ill intent toward ICE, probably a lot of relevance.
    - pcrh 3mo ago
      The crimes here are the injuring of an officer, and causing a disturbance near the ICE facility. How could the zines be evidence for those crimes?
      - bawolff 3mo ago
        Easily? Documents that could speak to the accused intentions, plans and motivations seem very pertinent to an investigation. They may or may not actually contain evidence, but they certainly seem related enough that police obtaining a search warrant for them is reasonable.
        deleted 3mo ago
        [deleted]
  - bawolff 3mo ago
    > Let's say someone is driving 35MPH. They think "oh snap, I think the speed limit is 30MPH here!". The posted speed limit is actually 40MPH. There is a difference between incorrect belief in what the law is vs incorrect belief in what actions you are taking. Although maybe that is not the most compelling. If you see the speed limit is 40, but you want to go faster so you hit the gas until you are going 60 and then brag with photo evidence about how you don't believe in speed limits on on facebook. Unbeknownst to you your spedometer was broken and you only hit 40. Should you get a ticket? That seems like a tougher call, but still a bit silly to give a ticket. a different example. You intend to murder someone. The intended victim puts their clothes on a manequin in hopes of distracting you while they make their escape. You shoot the manequin. Did you commit a crime?
    - vel0city 3mo ago
      Intending to murder someone is often directly a crime though, so yes. And murdering people is illegal. Moving some magazines isn't normally illegal. I wouldn't normally assume having some magazines is evidence of a crime. And if they are, what crime was owning the magazines involved in? That you happen to read some of the same articles as someone else who committed a crime? Is sharing the same books as others now implicating you as a terrorist?
      - BeetleB 3mo ago
        > Intending to murder someone is often directly a crime though Not at all. Committing an act with the intent to murder is a crime. Actual intent alone isn't.
      - bawolff 3mo ago
        > Moving some magazines isn't normally illegal. Neither is shooting a gun (at e.g. a gun range). This case has about as much to do with moving magazines as a murder charge has with discharging a firearm. Its intrinsic to the crime, but not what the actual crime is. > I wouldn't normally assume having some magazines is evidence of a crime. If someone called you up and told you that the magazine contained evidence of a crime, the police ard looking for them, and asked you to hide the magazines, would your assumptions change? Because that seems to be what happened here. > And if they are, what crime was owning the magazines involved in? That you happen to read some of the same articles as someone else who committed a crime? Is sharing the same books as others now implicating you as a terrorist? That is not even remotely what happened here. Nobody got in trouble for owning or reading the magazines in question.
  - Teever 3mo ago
    You might find this interesting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea
    - vel0city 3mo ago
      I'm very aware of mens rea. Is thinking you're committing a crime when you're not mens rea? That's the hypothetical above.
      - Teever 3mo ago
        It’s a good question. If I buy a bag of white powder thinking that it’s cocaine and it turns out the person selling it to me actually gave me a bag of flour did I commit a crime? What crime? If I’m angry at someone and I decide to kill them so I go over to their house late at night and see them sitting upright on their couch watching TV and I shoot them from the window and flee but it’s later discovered that they died of a heart attack two hours before I shot them did I commit a crime? What crime? If someone decides to commit suicide and they jump from an apartment building and coincidentally I decide to fire my gun out my window and as they pass by my window the bullet hits them in the head killing them instantly before they hit the ground am I guilty of a crime? What crime? These kind of Law & Order / first year law school type hypotheticals are useful ways to analyze the hypothetical that you’re raising.
- Chinjut 3mo ago
  What if you believe (correctly) that a corrupt government intends to punish you exorbitantly beyond reason for possession of these zines? Is it still immoral to move the zines? Is it so immoral that it therefore justifies 30 years of imprisonment for moving the zines?
  - bawolff 3mo ago
    > What if you believe (correctly) that a corrupt government intends to punish you exorbitantly beyond reason for possession of these zines? Well the belief is incorrect, since to date nobody was punished for possessing them, and there is no reason to suspect anyone would be. > Is it still immoral to move the zines? Morality and legality are totally separate things. Whether it is immoral depends on which system of morality you subscribe to, although i think you could make a reasonable argument that it was immoral in most popular morality systems. That said, i think your framing does a disservice. The question is, is it immoral to cover up a crime. The method used to do the cover up is irrelavent. > therefore justifies 30 years I tend to think 30 years is a bit steep, personally.
9x39 3mo ago
>What crime are zines evidence of? Not quite the right framing. Look at the chain of events in the probable cause affidavit:https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410500/gov.uscourts.txnd.410500.1.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.41... Rueda was in the jail following arrest in an armed group after a firefight at the detention center where 20-30 rifle rounds had been fired, with a police officer killed as a result. In jail, Rueda called her mother to contact Sanchez because he would know what was going on. Rueda later directly called Sanchez and said, 'whatever you need to do, move whatever you need at the house'. Sanchez indicated to Rueda he had already been to her house. Sanchez was then observed leaving his house with zines and was observed moving the zines to an apartment of someone else's. The zines were the same TTPs for anti-gov, anti-LE civil unrest topics as seen before and thus considered likely to be connected. All in all, moving evidence from an investigation involving armed groups engaging in firefights with ICE isn't a stretch once we don't omit the facts known.
- kristjansson 3mo ago
  Not killed, wounded.
  - 9x39 3mo ago
    Thank you, that’s right.
- pcrh 3mo ago
  At worst, the zines are evidence of Rueda's political opinions. They are not evidence of conspiracy to set off fireworks near the compound, nor shoot an officer.
  - 9x39 3mo ago
    Prosecutors were successful in using them as evidence of connection between the members, and as a result of building that connection partly through the zines, held them jointly accountable for the groups overall actions. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410489/gov.uscourts.txnd.410489.385.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.41...
s1artibartfast 3mo ago
I didn't see anyone arguing it was worth 30. I saw a lot aruing that it was a crime, and more than moving zines

by Chinjut 3mo ago

A lot of people in these Hacker News comments are accepting the framing that moving the zines is evidence tampering and therefore deserves a 30 year sentence. What crime are zines evidence of?

bawolff 3mo ago

I don't think that is the relavent question. Did he move the items because he believed that they were evidence being sought by the police? I don't really care if they are actually evidence of something or not. I care if the accused believed they were and moved them for that purpose.

vel0city 3mo ago
Let's say someone is driving 35MPH. They think "oh snap, I think the speed limit is 30MPH here!". The posted speed limit is actually 40MPH. Was this person speeding or not? Should a cop ticket them for thinking they're doing something wrong, even if everything they were doing was legal? Did they even think the zines were implicated as evidence? Were the zines implicated as evidence? What crimes were being committed by ownership of these zines? If there's a warrant issued to search a house, and a resident of that house eats a ham sandwich for lunch while the cops are on their way, did they destroy evidence?
- BobbyJo 3mo ago
  It's not illegal "because you think its illegal", it's illegal because "you had a court order to provide things that are relevant and you instead hid things you thought were relevant". If I hide someone who I think did a crime to help them escape police, I've now implicated myself in the crime, whether or not my trying to hide them actually caused them to get away with it.
  - vel0city 3mo ago
    > it's illegal because "you had a court order to provide things that are relevant and you instead hid things you thought were relevant" And yet when Trump does it with classified documents its not a problem. Where's his 30 years? Did he even have a warrant issued to him related to these documents? Are these zines even relevant evidence? Is everyone who has these magazines also now a criminal? What about other radical anti-government political pamphlets like Common Sense? > If I hide someone who I think did a crime to help them escape police Seems like quite a different thing than moving some political pamphlets. If they were shredding financial documents while being charged with financial crimes I'd agree. If they were hiding guns with a gun trafficking charge, I'd understand. Flushing drugs down the drain, sure. Moving political zines though? Really? What's the relevance again for the ownership of political pamphlets to committing crimes?
    - MichaelZuo 3mo ago
      If you knew it’s significantly different from your speeding example… why did you reply with such a misleading example in the first place?
      - vel0city 3mo ago
        I mean its a very radically different thing in almost every way than what was originally proposed. The zines didn't commit any crimes. Let's say you hide someone who didn't actually commit a crime but you thought they did. Are you still guilty of hiding a suspect in the crime that wasn't a crime? The standard was: > I care if the accused believed they were and moved them for that purpose So to that poster what matters was that the zines being useful or not to the investigation was not relevant, it was if the person thought it was potentially relevant or not. The wife owning some zines is evidence of a crime? Really? Owning some zines is evidence of criminal activity these days?
    - BobbyJo 3mo ago
      > "but what about.." I don't know. > Did he even have a warrant issued to him related to these documents? Yes. A zine put together by a group that later goes on to commit a crime together, that promotes the ideologies underlying the crime, feels like the kind of thing a search warrant/subpoena would apply to. The fact that the person involved in the crime asked that they be hidden makes it pretty obvious that they saw it that way as well. > Are these zines even relevant evidence? Yes. > Is everyone who has these magazines also now a criminal? No. Things can be legal and evidence of ill intent at the same time. > What about other radical anti-government political pamphlets like Common Sense? If the editor(s) of that pamphlet went on to commit a crime of a political nature, no doubt their relationship with the pamphlet would be evidence used against them. It would also still be perfectly legal to have, and legal for others to continue publishing. > Seems like quite a different thing than moving some political pamphlets. It is, but I think the core idea of involving yourself in the crime by way of trying to hide evidence etc. is similar at least. > What's the relevance again for the ownership of political pamphlets to committing crimes? Depends on the crime. If they had robbed a Wendy's, probably no relevance. If they attacked an ICE building and the pamphlets established ill intent toward ICE, probably a lot of relevance.
  - pcrh 3mo ago
    The crimes here are the injuring of an officer, and causing a disturbance near the ICE facility. How could the zines be evidence for those crimes?
    - bawolff 3mo ago
      Easily? Documents that could speak to the accused intentions, plans and motivations seem very pertinent to an investigation. They may or may not actually contain evidence, but they certainly seem related enough that police obtaining a search warrant for them is reasonable.
      - deleted 3mo ago
        [deleted]
- bawolff 3mo ago
  > Let's say someone is driving 35MPH. They think "oh snap, I think the speed limit is 30MPH here!". The posted speed limit is actually 40MPH. There is a difference between incorrect belief in what the law is vs incorrect belief in what actions you are taking. Although maybe that is not the most compelling. If you see the speed limit is 40, but you want to go faster so you hit the gas until you are going 60 and then brag with photo evidence about how you don't believe in speed limits on on facebook. Unbeknownst to you your spedometer was broken and you only hit 40. Should you get a ticket? That seems like a tougher call, but still a bit silly to give a ticket. a different example. You intend to murder someone. The intended victim puts their clothes on a manequin in hopes of distracting you while they make their escape. You shoot the manequin. Did you commit a crime?
  - vel0city 3mo ago
    Intending to murder someone is often directly a crime though, so yes. And murdering people is illegal. Moving some magazines isn't normally illegal. I wouldn't normally assume having some magazines is evidence of a crime. And if they are, what crime was owning the magazines involved in? That you happen to read some of the same articles as someone else who committed a crime? Is sharing the same books as others now implicating you as a terrorist?
    - BeetleB 3mo ago
      > Intending to murder someone is often directly a crime though Not at all. Committing an act with the intent to murder is a crime. Actual intent alone isn't.
    - bawolff 3mo ago
      > Moving some magazines isn't normally illegal. Neither is shooting a gun (at e.g. a gun range). This case has about as much to do with moving magazines as a murder charge has with discharging a firearm. Its intrinsic to the crime, but not what the actual crime is. > I wouldn't normally assume having some magazines is evidence of a crime. If someone called you up and told you that the magazine contained evidence of a crime, the police ard looking for them, and asked you to hide the magazines, would your assumptions change? Because that seems to be what happened here. > And if they are, what crime was owning the magazines involved in? That you happen to read some of the same articles as someone else who committed a crime? Is sharing the same books as others now implicating you as a terrorist? That is not even remotely what happened here. Nobody got in trouble for owning or reading the magazines in question.
- Teever 3mo ago
  You might find this interesting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea
  - vel0city 3mo ago
    I'm very aware of mens rea. Is thinking you're committing a crime when you're not mens rea? That's the hypothetical above.
    - Teever 3mo ago
      It’s a good question. If I buy a bag of white powder thinking that it’s cocaine and it turns out the person selling it to me actually gave me a bag of flour did I commit a crime? What crime? If I’m angry at someone and I decide to kill them so I go over to their house late at night and see them sitting upright on their couch watching TV and I shoot them from the window and flee but it’s later discovered that they died of a heart attack two hours before I shot them did I commit a crime? What crime? If someone decides to commit suicide and they jump from an apartment building and coincidentally I decide to fire my gun out my window and as they pass by my window the bullet hits them in the head killing them instantly before they hit the ground am I guilty of a crime? What crime? These kind of Law & Order / first year law school type hypotheticals are useful ways to analyze the hypothetical that you’re raising.
Chinjut 3mo ago
What if you believe (correctly) that a corrupt government intends to punish you exorbitantly beyond reason for possession of these zines? Is it still immoral to move the zines? Is it so immoral that it therefore justifies 30 years of imprisonment for moving the zines?
- bawolff 3mo ago
  > What if you believe (correctly) that a corrupt government intends to punish you exorbitantly beyond reason for possession of these zines? Well the belief is incorrect, since to date nobody was punished for possessing them, and there is no reason to suspect anyone would be. > Is it still immoral to move the zines? Morality and legality are totally separate things. Whether it is immoral depends on which system of morality you subscribe to, although i think you could make a reasonable argument that it was immoral in most popular morality systems. That said, i think your framing does a disservice. The question is, is it immoral to cover up a crime. The method used to do the cover up is irrelavent. > therefore justifies 30 years I tend to think 30 years is a bit steep, personally.

9x39 3mo ago

>What crime are zines evidence of? Not quite the right framing. Look at the chain of events in the probable cause affidavit:https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410500/gov.uscourts.txnd.410500.1.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.41... Rueda was in the jail following arrest in an armed group after a firefight at the detention center where 20-30 rifle rounds had been fired, with a police officer killed as a result. In jail, Rueda called her mother to contact Sanchez because he would know what was going on. Rueda later directly called Sanchez and said, 'whatever you need to do, move whatever you need at the house'. Sanchez indicated to Rueda he had already been to her house. Sanchez was then observed leaving his house with zines and was observed moving the zines to an apartment of someone else's. The zines were the same TTPs for anti-gov, anti-LE civil unrest topics as seen before and thus considered likely to be connected. All in all, moving evidence from an investigation involving armed groups engaging in firefights with ICE isn't a stretch once we don't omit the facts known.

kristjansson 3mo ago
Not killed, wounded.
- 9x39 3mo ago
  Thank you, that’s right.
pcrh 3mo ago
At worst, the zines are evidence of Rueda's political opinions. They are not evidence of conspiracy to set off fireworks near the compound, nor shoot an officer.
- 9x39 3mo ago
  Prosecutors were successful in using them as evidence of connection between the members, and as a result of building that connection partly through the zines, held them jointly accountable for the groups overall actions. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.410489/gov.uscourts.txnd.410489.385.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.41...

s1artibartfast 3mo ago

I didn't see anyone arguing it was worth 30. I saw a lot aruing that it was a crime, and more than moving zines