Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- 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?by Chinjut
- 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
- 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.
by bawolff - >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.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.
by 9x39 - Is there a functional Samizdat in US?by type0
- This judge has a very high rate of overturned rulings, and reliably rules for conservative causes.
Prosecutors openly acknowledge strategically filing cases in his court for conservative causes.
It isn't a mistake that he was the judge here, and there is a very good chance the sentences will be overturned if not entire cases.
Of course, that doesn't matter to these defendants, some of whom probably do deserve punishment for what they did, and all of whom will suffer through years of appeals, stress, etc. because some prosecutor wanted to make their career on a big case, and will have moved on years before this is all resolved.
In short, the case was made for headlines, and after putting the defendants through hell, appeals will invalidate most of those headlines after incurring great expense on behalf of the taxpayers and defendants.
by dghlsakjg - Here's him speaking at the Federalist Society - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMTt9pxWBhAby kpennell
- And following on from that, this has all the hallmarks of a successful appeal for unreasonable sentences. However, it's going to go to the Fifth Circuit, who are, ah, not known for their friendliness to criminal defendants.
- Insane charges, insane justifications, and judging by the comments in this thread, I feel insane for having ever believed in the myth of the "decent conservative".by thunderfork
- Hacker News is for people who believe in the hacker ethos "It is immoral to do anything the government takes issue with and you deserve whatever punishment you get for doing so, unless it was breaking regulations to make money, the highest calling".by Chinjut
- USA is such a weird place these days. Is there a way back to sanity once this administration ends?by kubafu
- Here's the thing: The traditional / establishment democrats have blindly believed that you can negotiate with people like Trump, because of decorum. Establishment candidates have been more occupied with taking the moral high-road, even if that resulted in loss after loss.
There's this ingrained belief that if you just play nice with republicans, they'll play nice back. And that was valid for a long, long time. The problem is that Trump completely upended that, though he was not the start of it - he's just the natural consequence of populism and the ground that had been fertilized for years.
The reason why Trump has been allowed to hijack the republican party, is because of how the two-party system in the US works. Trump has an iron grip on a sizable number of voters, and thus the GOP had to kowtow to Trump.
Luckily Trump is MAGA, and MAGA is Trump. I fully expect that the current MAGA movement will fracture and splinter into smaller factions once Trump is out. And from the looks of it, they do not have any plan B. No front runner in sight.
by TrackerFF - No country has ever recovered from this sort of thing. At best the empire collapses and the country survives as a country and becomes a vassal of a different empire (likely China, or BRICS). If recovery was possible, we wouldn't have gotten this far already.by someonebaggy
- IMO the DNC needs to grow a spine and perform hard correction and repair. Which is to say, I don't think that will happen, and some form of collapse is inevitable.
But I'm far from a political scientist. Just an engineer with a history hobby, pattern matching.
by birdsongs - The way back to sanity would've required the opposition party to be worth anything. Right now they're busy writing up their own project 2029 plan which involves cracking down on the internet and whining about the old guard getting voted out of office for being feckless.by fzeroracer
- Recommending this independent journalist's article that pays attention to other colorful characters in this story:
https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/450-years-in-prison-for-sa...
by rixed - 5 days ago, 90 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48649884by WalterGR
- Thank you, at least that article doesn't require an email address to read it.
> One fired an AR-15 at the police, which goes beyond legitimate protest into inciting violence (and maybe even deliberate provocation).
Uh, I think firing a gun at someone is a bit more than "inciting violence", more like attempted murder?
The article doesn't say what the actual charges were. Was it tampering with evidence? Although 30 years for just tampering with evidence doesn't seem right either. Maybe there's more that they're leaving out?
Another comment in another HN thread shared this quote and link:
> "Prosecutors said that the group launched a premeditated terror attack on the detention facility inspired by antifa ideology, by setting off fireworks, vandalizing property, and shooting at police officers who responded. One officer was struck in the neck with a bullet and survived."
https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/ice-detention-attack-defe...
Perhaps the cop getting shot in the neck is why they're throwing the book at them.
by rationalist - Even if he did exactly what they said he did, no way that's worth 30 years. But people really need to realize that the justice system has been and never will be "blind" or "fair" or whatever you may think it is. It is wielded by those in power largely as they see fit, so keep that in mind if you're thinking about messing with the feds.by green_wheel
- It seems especially bad now. This relativistic mindset is really bad for critical thought: "oh, it was never 100% fair". Well, if it was 80% earlier, it seems approaching 20% now. It's a whole new level.by pnt12
- Here's the case: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndtx/pr/antifa-cell-members-con...
The 30 year sentence was for hiding documentation being sought under a federal warrant after being called by his wife and asking him to do so. The warrant was for documentation after the protesters shot fireworks to bring out first responders from the ICE facility, and allegedly one of the group shot a responder in the neck instead of the head.
A lot of stuff to scrutinize and complain about in the sentence, but it wasn't just "transporting Zines"
by Xorakios - There are murderers who get shorter sentences. This is a clear attempt to discourage ICE protests by using the label "Antifa" as some sort of left-wing terrorist organization to send a message as the Trump appointed judge stated.by goatlover
- > make clear that those who choose violence over lawful expression will face the full force of the American justice system
I’m sure Iran agrees.
by Aeolun - It’s not “alleged” that one of the terrorists shot an officer in the neck. It was proven in court that he did and he was convicted for it.
- > The 30 year sentence was for hiding documentation being sought under a federal warrant
Can you cite a source to support the claim that the stuff he transported was being sought under a federal warrant at the time he transported it? And is there documentation showing that he was aware of the warrant?
by flossposse - Let's not ignore the fact that:
- The group was designated as "Antifa cell", and thus this became a terrorist and aiding terrorism charges.
- The judge went above and beyond to hand out harsh punishments. There's been commentary from previous state prosecutors that the sentences, and how they were carried out, were much harsher than predicted. The speculation was that these sentences are being handed out to be served consecutively, not concurrently.
Would not surprise me if some of them could be appealed as "cruel and unusual punishments" / 8th amendment.
by TrackerFF - Exactly. The content of the zines was not an issue in the case.
This case is crazy, but it's not insane for free speech reasons.
- If this was an incident in Europe, comments like this would be talking about how clearly the state is corrupt, it’s account cannot be trusted, and obviously civilisation is collapsing because free speech outside of the US is dead. “You can be arrested for zines!”
Inside the US though? No, clearly the state’s account is definitely accurate, the citizen is obviously guilty, it’s not only correct they are being jailed it is actually good, free speech - oh it’s not relevant because they committed unrelated crimes (we’re told. By the state’s account).
US propaganda/copaganda on its own citizens really is something else to behold
by dwroberts - > The 30 year sentence was for hiding documentation [...] it wasn't just "transporting Zines"
As far as I can tell, the moving of zines (he was pulled over and had a box in his car) is what's being presented as "hiding documentation" - not something beyond that.
> being sought under a federal warrant
Timeline seems to be that a warrant was obtained after pulling him over ("Sanchez-Estrada was then arrested on state traffic offenses, and officers obtained a search warrant [...]"). Can't find a source saying there was a warrant prior to this.
> The warrant was for documentation after the protesters shot fireworks to bring out first responders from the ICE facility, and allegedly one of the group shot a responder in the neck instead of the head.
It's true that demonstrators were setting off fireworks, and it's true that Benjamin Song later shot at a police officer who had drawn his gun. But it's just the government's narrative/speculation that the intent of the fireworks was to draw out first responders to ambush, and that Sanchez-Estrada's zines were in some way documentation of this despite him not being at the protest and his wife not being the shooter.
by Ukv - It's pretty straightforward that if someone tells you to hide something because they've been arrested and they think it ties them to some criminal act, and then you hide it, you're an accessory to the crime. 30 years for that seems harsh though I anticipate they will be pardoned by the next Democratic Party President.
Describing such an act without the obvious context is a pretty good way to point out that it's partisan text and likely misrepresents other things. Listen, we've all been on the Internet a few decades. This kind of understatement of things is not new to any of us. "Oh so just because your country thinks it's not a big deal for someone to go to America to fly a plane means it should get bombed?" No, champ, it's the flying of the plane into the WTC and subsequent sheltering of the guy who planned it that does that.
by arjie