...by the insistence that Sally Jacobsen committed no crime because she was worried someone might actually closely examine their own moral position on abortion if "confronted" with the crosses. The Cinncinnati Inquirer reports:
[Jacobsen] said she was offended by the simulated cemetery, which she considered intimidating and harmful to women who might be considering abortions. NKU's campus newspaper, the Northerner, published photos of Jacobsen dismantling part of the display.If you have not followed this story, TOC has here and here, as only two examples out of half-a-dozen.
Jacobsen's lawyer, the eponymous Margo Grubbs, apparently failed her Constitutional Law courses:
Jacobsen will plead not guilty, Grubbs said. Grubbs said the dismantling of the display doesn't amount to a criminal act.Who gives a rat's ass what Jacobsen's intent was? If that excuse worked, then - "I didn't mean to kill him, I was just upset." should, too.
"The intent was just an expression of freedom of speech," Grubbs said. "She saw harm coming from it, and she was just expressing her attitude towards the harm."
Throw the book at her. She can write a feminist manifesto, an apology for the arrogant presumption that she is qualified to think for others, and an analysis of the First Amendment while she's in Martha Stewart's old cell.
In Los Angeles, if the crime was tearing down illegal immigrant support posters in a gay bar, the Feds would be issuing charges under Civil Rights/hate crime statutes.
Where do these people get the idea that they possess moral and intellectual superiority sufficient to place them outside the law? I guess it's comparable to tenure.