Obama-appointed US Atty Weighs in on Twin Falls Assault
Wendy J. Olsen is the US Attorney for Idaho. She is charged with representing the Federal government for all civil and criminal cases within the state. She is not, however, supposed to inject herself into the middle of local cases such as the assault on the 5 year old Twin Falls child. She did anyway.
As reported by WND, her statement, released Friday, reads as follows:
“The United States Attorney’s Office extends its support to the five-year-old victim of assault, and her family, at the Fawnbrook Apartments in Twin Falls.
The United States Attorney’s Office further encourages community members in Twin Falls and throughout Idaho to remain calm and supportive, to pay close attention to the facts that have been released by law enforcement and the prosecuting attorney, and to avoid spreading false rumors and inaccuracies.
Grant Loebs is an experienced prosecutor, and Chief Craig Kingsbury is an experienced law enforcement officer. They are moving fairly and thoughtfully in this case. As Mr. Loebs and Chief Kingsbury informed the public, the subjects in this case are juveniles, ages 14, 10 and 7. The criminal justice system, whether at the state or federal level, requires that juveniles be afforded a specific process with significant restrictions on the information that can be released. The fact that the subjects are juveniles in no way lessens the harm to or impact on the victim and her family.
The spread of false information or inflammatory or threatening statements about the perpetrators or the crime itself reduces public safety and may violate federal law. We have seen time and again that the spread of falsehoods about refugees divides our communities. I urge all citizens and residents to allow Mr. Loebs and Chief Kingsbury and their teams to do their jobs.”
What was the point?
Most normal citizens understand that information regarding a case like this are not always accurate at the beginning. But Ms. Olsen’s statement did not help the matter, and may produce a backlash.
Ann Corcoran, author of the Refugee Resettlement Watch blog and the book “Refugee Resettlement and the Hijra to America,said that the release had a familiar ring to it…
“This is threatening free speech. It’s the federal government trying to intimidate into silence those citizens who don’t have resources or connections. This must mean we have hit a nerve with this administration.” Ann Corcoran
Violation of Federal Law? What law is that?
The facts of this case are murky because by Idaho Code they must be sealed by the court due to the juveniles involved. Idaho does have an expressed set of rules for juveniles, both offenders and victims.
There is a huge difference between “making a threat coupled with the apparent ability to carry out that threat” (the definition of assault), and statements about not wanting Muslim refugees in their cities. Threatening the local populace of Twin Falls or the media involved is arrogant.
When the US attorney, or any other federal entity, starts telling people that their ability to speak out against the Muslim refugees could be in violation of the law, we have to ask…what law is that?
When did they pass a speech law in the United States? What’s the code number? Title 18 – of the US Criminal code says nothing about “inflammatory remarks.” The First Amendment, however says a lot:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”