Connect with us

Preparedness

San Diego Judge Finalizes Sentencing of Antifa Members after Violent Clash

Published

on

A wave of legal repercussions has crashed down on eight members of Antifa in Southern California after a high-profile violent clash in the early days of 2021. These sentences are seen by many as the first successful closure of an Antifa-related conspiracy case. The series of incidents that led to these court proceedings happened on January 9, 2021, less than two weeks before the inauguration of President Joe Biden.

On this day, a rally was planned by a group of Trump supporters at Pacific Beach, California and was counter-protested by dozens of Antifa members. What started as a peaceful assembly quickly spiraled out of control.

“Antifa could have assembled and protested and stood across the street and called them white supremacists, but you cannot use force to suppress others’ freedom of speech.”

Reportedly, the Antifa members, prepared for violence, assaulted Trump supporters and bystanders with bear mace, pepper spray, and other chemicals. According to Andy Ngo, a Post Millennial senior editor and dedicated Antifa reporter, these Antifa associates also engaged in physical violence, including punching, kicking, and hitting people with skateboards.

In the aftermath, a total of 12 Antifa associates were indicted, with most choosing to plead guilty. Nevertheless, two individuals, Brian Lightfoot and Jeremy White, opted to defend their case before the jury. Ultimately, they were convicted.

In a recent ruling by San Diego Superior Court Judge Daniel Goldstein, eight defendants, including White and Lightfoot, were sentenced. This follows four prior sentencing decisions related to the same event.

The list of convicted Antifa affiliates from the Pacific Beach riot includes:

Alexander Akridge-Jacobs (33) – Pled guilty to felony conspiracy to riot and felony assault, sentenced to nine months in county jail. He is expected to be released in November.

Jonah Bigel – Pled guilty in 2021 to assault with a deadly weapon, received a suspended prison sentence. Did not appear in court.

Jesse Cannon (34) – Pled guilty to felony conspiracy to riot, two counts of felony assault, and felony assault in an unrelated case. Sentenced to five years in prison, eligible for parole in December.

Joseph Gaskins (23) – Pled guilty to felony assault and assault with a deadly weapon in a 2020 BLM riot. Sentenced to one year in county jail with an additional two years of probation. Expected release is in December.

Brian Lightfoot (27) – Convicted of felony conspiracy to riot and five counts of unlawful use of tear gas. Sentenced to two years in a “fire camp” prison to learn firefighting skills.

Christian Martinez (25) – Pled guilty to felony conspiracy to riot and felony assault. Sentenced to six months in county jail and probation. Expected release is in September.

Luis Mora (32) – Pled guilty to felony conspiracy to riot and felony assault. Sentenced to two years and eight months in state prison. Eligible for parole in August 2025.

Samuel “Ruchelle” Ogden (26) – Pled guilty to felony conspiracy to riot and felony assault. Sentenced to one year in county jail and two years probation.

Bryan Rivera (22) – Pled guilty to felony conspiracy to riot and felony assault. Sentenced to 180 days in county jail.

Faraz Talab (29) – Pled guilty to felony conspiracy to riot and felony assault. Sentenced to one year in jail and two years’ probation. Scheduled for release in December.

Jeremy White (41) – Convicted of felony conspiracy to riot. Sentenced to two years in state prison.

Erich “Nikki” Yach (40) – Pled guilty to felony conspiracy to riot, felony assault, and felony unlawful use of tear gas. Sentenced to four years and eight months in prison. Eligible for parole in October.

This landmark case, culminating in the sentencing of these twelve Antifa associates, sends a potent message on the legal consequences of violence and disorder.


Do you agree with the judge's decision to have Antifa associates serve time in jail stemming from violence as part of maintaining public safety and respecting legal rights?

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Source

6 Comments

6 Comments

  1. Virginia Herbert

    July 17, 2024 at 11:30 am

    Their senteces were too light. People attending Jan 6 ptotest who never touched another person were sentenced for severa years. These terrorists got off very light. Hopefully the victims will bring civil suits

  2. Jennifer V

    July 17, 2024 at 1:09 pm

    For too long, protesters that use violence and destruction to silence another group have been getting away with either too light of a sentence/charges, or nothing at all as a consequence. This practice has led to a free for all mentality that sends the message that it’s ok to be destructive and violent to whomever they disagree with. Many people now fear to say out loud what they feel or which way they stand on any given subject to even whom they support in an election. We used to be able to proudly say I stand with xyz or I disagree with the way things are being done without being in fear of our lives, family or property being violated. Groups like these have caused true terror in our society and it needs to be called out and punished to the full extent of the law! Soft on crime and violence policies are destroying our world and sending a message that it’s ok to do what you want, you will never have to answer for it. This is not a partisan issue either. Anyone that breaks the law and uses violence and destruction to silence another person or group should be punished accordingly.

  3. Timothy

    July 17, 2024 at 2:29 pm

    judge needs to buy security for the future. Many kooks in Kookyfornia

  4. Helen

    July 18, 2024 at 12:13 am

    Wish the sentences were longer than what is stated in the article. I’m sure they will continue the assaults after they are released. These people are really sick!!

  5. Old Man

    July 20, 2024 at 11:43 am

    Round them all up, put them on a boat, and ship them back to Africa.

  6. John Harrison

    July 20, 2024 at 4:51 pm

    That’s all? when J6ers are still in jail waiting trial or release.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Preparedness

German Activist Fined After Surviving Brutal Attack at Rally

Published

on

In a striking turn of events, a German activist known for his vocal criticism of political Islam has been fined by a regional court, following an attack on him earlier this year. Michael Stürzenberger, an activist with the Citizens’ Movement, Pax Europa, was among those injured during a stabbing spree by an Afghan migrant at an anti-jihad rally in Mannheim on May 31. The violent incident left him with severe injuries, including a stab wound to the thigh and a “gaping open wound” on his face.

Despite these traumatic events, Stürzenberger found himself facing legal repercussions for statements made at a rally in 2020. The Hamburg District Court had initially sentenced him to six months in prison for incitement, a decision that he appealed. Although the sentence was later suspended, the court ultimately upheld the conviction, imposing a fine of $3,804.65.

The charges against Stürzenberger stemmed from his comments on German immigration policy and his critique of political Islam. At the rally, he had pointed out that Muslim migrants from certain regions were disproportionately involved in crimes, and emphasized the need to address the influence of political Islam on women’s rights.

Stürzenberger clarified his stance, stating, “I have always spoken about political Islam. Always said: It is not against Muslims!” He further explained, “My criticism is only directed against the dangerous components of the ideology and those radicals who commit acts of violence as a result of it.”

The activist’s conviction is part of a broader trend in Germany, where individuals have faced legal consequences for expressing concerns about the impacts of mass immigration. This has been a contentious issue, especially as reports indicate a rise in violent crimes linked to immigrant populations.

German Interior Minister Nancy Faeser recently acknowledged challenges associated with young men of migrant backgrounds, who are often involved in acts of violence. She emphasized the need for effective education and integration programs to address these issues.

The situation has further highlighted safety concerns in German cities, with certain areas becoming increasingly unsafe for minorities. Berlin’s chief of police, Barbara Slowik, advised caution for individuals in specific neighborhoods, particularly those with significant Arab populations.

These developments underscore the complexities and tensions surrounding immigration and integration in Germany. As the country grapples with these issues, the case of Michael Stürzenberger serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between free expression and the need to address hate speech.


How should countries balance personal safety, free speech, and legal rights in cases involving criticism of religious or political groups?

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Source

Continue Reading

Preparedness

Clerk’s Quick Reaction Sparks Debate on Self-Defense Rights

Published

on

In a recent incident that has sparked considerable debate, a New Orleans convenience store clerk fatally shot a 16-year-old armed robber during an attempted robbery. The event unfolded when two armed individuals entered the store, demanding cash. Surveillance footage captured 16-year-old Cecil Batiz pointing a gun with an extended magazine at the clerk working at the cell phone counter of Sam’s Meat Market.

As the situation escalated, Batiz was seen stuffing cash and other items into his pockets. The other suspect, 18-year-old Teony Juarez, was wearing a black ski mask. As the suspects attempted to leave the store, the clerk retrieved a firearm and discharged it, striking Batiz in the abdomen, causing him to collapse. The surveillance video further showed the clerk stepping out of camera view, only to return moments later and fire additional shots at Batiz as he lay on the store floor. Batiz succumbed to his injuries later at a hospital.

Juarez, in the midst of the chaos, returned fire and sustained an injury to his right forearm while fleeing the scene. An unidentified woman transported Juarez to a hospital, where he was treated and subsequently arrested. Juarez faces multiple charges, including armed robbery, aggravated battery, and illegal use of a weapon, with his bond set at $170,000.

The store clerk has not been charged, and Loyola Law Professor Dane Ciolino expressed skepticism about the likelihood of charges being filed.
“That clerk was in an obviously high-stress situation and saw the perpetrator still moving with a gun, and it’s hard to second-guess his decision to use deadly force yet again.”

Ciolino also clarified that under Louisiana law, Juarez cannot be charged for Batiz’s death, as the fatal act was committed by the victim, not a co-felon.

Orleans Parish District Attorney Jason Williams refrained from delving into case specifics but remarked,
“Once somebody puts a gun in your face, the rules change.”
He further noted,
“It’s painfully obvious to anyone who saw that video what those two people were doing in that store, and that shop owner did not ask for that exchange.”

Williams, who was elected in December 2020 with support from a PAC funded by George Soros, has recently undergone a shift in perspective regarding crime and punishment. This change came after a personal experience where he and his 78-year-old mother were victims of a carjacking. Following the incident, Williams recused himself from the carjacking case and acknowledged a transformation in his views, even reversing some of his previous campaign promises.


Should store clerks have the right to use a firearm in self-defense if threatened with a gun during a robbery?

Watch a local news report about the incident below:

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Source

Continue Reading

Preparedness

Daring Homeowner Defends Home Against Burglar, Ignites Wild Police Chase

Published

on

In a dramatic sequence of events in Sacramento, California, a homeowner took action against a suspected burglar, setting off a chain of incidents that culminated in a high-speed police chase. The Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office reported the initial burglary attempt occurred around 3 p.m. on Chandler Drive in south Sacramento.

Amar Gandhi, a spokesperson for the sheriff’s department, described the suspect as a “lifelong criminal” with a history spanning over two decades. “Theft charges, gun charges, drug charges — you name it, he’s got everything under the sun,” Gandhi remarked, highlighting the suspect’s extensive criminal past.

The alleged thief, identified as 40-year-old Emelio Correa, attempted to force his way into a home. Despite the family’s efforts to deter him by shouting for him to leave, Correa persisted. Authorities revealed that the homeowner, a legal gun owner, fired at least one shot, striking Correa in the hand. Blood evidence was reportedly left at the scene.

The confrontation left a visible mark, with police investigating a front-entrance window that bore a large bullet hole. However, the incident did not end there.

Correa managed to enter a different residence shortly after. The owner of this second home, Cuong Nguyen, explained that the suspect gained access because the front door had been inadvertently left unlocked. Once inside, Correa found keys on a truck’s front seat in the garage.

Nguyen, who was not present during the break-in, recounted how Correa drove the truck through the garage door, leaving half of it “in the middle of the street” upon Nguyen’s return. This theft led to a high-speed pursuit on Highway 99.

The chase concluded when Correa encountered spike strips near Arno Road, causing the truck to roll into a ditch. He was subsequently taken into custody.

Correa suffered minor injuries and is currently held in Sacramento County jail on a $100,000 bond. He faces four felony charges and is scheduled to appear in court on Tuesday.

The incident underscores the importance of home security and the unpredictable nature of criminal activity, as even a brief lapse in vigilance can lead to significant consequences.


Should homeowners have the right to use firearms to defend their property against suspected burglars?

Watch a local news report about the incident below:

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Source

Continue Reading

Trending

" "