March in DC January 6

[mike]

i sent a question to mods.
i’m not sure about naming+shaming little girls, esp by well-educated responsible men. her older brothers in Christ.

it reminds of Nick Sandmann, only she doesn’t have as many rights and options (in her own community).
NS’s community jumped to criticize him, too! The legal world vindicated him.

i have no problem understanding any human has inconsistencies in beliefs+actions, not even young CM teens.
If your name isn’t Jesus Christ, you are very likely guilty.

I don't have a problem with naming people who are named in public news articles. Also this doesn't seem to be a young teen at all. She appears to be a very misguided adult. I would also think it's worth questioning whether she is actually a member in good standing at a CM church.

i pretty much agree, altho, from the above post, it seemed she may have been a teen.
still, she’s not present to defend herself/explain, but the rumor mill is active and quoted.

even as an outsider, this seems a bit borderline, considering past topics and complaints of “getting personal.”
at least, on forum, when other members are addressed, they are present to respond.

i had not thought about head coverings making the wearer a special target for criticism.

Committing a crime has repercussions for one's privacy.

[Josh]

Correction: accused of a (political) crime.

[temporal1]

mike:
Committing a crime has repercussions for one's privacy.

it should, and often does. unfortunately, not always, not consistently. not in faith communities or in the world. there remains the matter of “innocent until proven guilty.” in secular law. i think this fairly aligns with Jesus. (not to the point of manipulating law to protect/enable the guilty) - but lawyers are well paid to accomplish this.

possibly, had i not read the post referring to high schoolers, i wouldn’t have thought so much about it. i’m not sure.
there are a few on this forum who (appear) quick to jump on conservatives (esp those with head coverings) - maybe that’s how it should be.

i’m an outsider. i wouldn’t want to do that.
in my view, it’s an awful lot like the Nick Sandmann situation. there was a rush to judgment by a lot of people, leaders in his church, the media, some on this forum. the optics presented looked bad, i saw it. NS “looked” guilty.

Jussie Smollett was the same. many were anxious to jump to his defense. because, they WANTED to believe him.
there is pleasure in jumping. it’s not a healthy pleasure.

there are times when there are no winners.

when bin laden was executed, i wasn’t happy. i was numb. sober. sad.
same with dylann roof. now on death row.

i find no glory in what these men did, nor in their punishments.

there are times when no outcome is ok. there are times when there is pain and nothing else. life is not pain-free.
thankfully, scriptures warn about pain. earthly life would be so much harder if scriptures did not tell the whole Truth.

if she is guilty, then so be it.
either way, i don’t think she (or others in plain clothing criticized for, ex., legally standing on a roadside) should be identified and discussed, laughed at, etc., without opp or invitation to explain or reply. (in general, not on this one topic.) if they’re not invited or not wanted here, ok. but they shouldn’t be (named+shamed) without representation.

i mean, admin+mods decide. this is my personal opinion.

and, yes, i do believe there is an attempt to identify everyone wearing plain clothes in any photo, or, at least, their fellowship.
whether names are shared on this forum or not. i’m pretty sure more goes on outside this forum than on public forum. (i’m not prying, nor have i.) i don’t object to it, at all. i just want to be frank about my perceptions.

mike,
i also want to be frank that i highly respect+value you in every way. i don’t want this to be misconstrued that i’m criticizing you.
i rely on you, your responses and leadership. i wouldn’t want to be without you (and others present). i hope i’ve made that clear over years. no change.

i never anticipated comparing a headcovering with a MAGA hat before. i’m adjusting to that.
right now, that seems quite a load to put on women/girls, i don’t believe originally intended. i admit confusion.
maybe i’ll get it after awhile.

i don’t think plain clothing should translate to, “we never make mistakes, we never err.” then be weaponized when errors (or difference of opinion) arise.

[mike]

if she is guilty, then so be it.
either way, i don’t think she (or others in plain clothing criticized for, ex., legally standing on a roadside) should be identified and discussed, laughed at, etc., without opp or invitation to explain or reply. (in general, not on this one topic.) if they’re not invited or not wanted here, ok. but they shouldn’t be (named+shamed) without representation.

It happens constantly that people who commit crimes (allegedly, of course, which is what is always the case prior to conviction) where the evidence is either already public or made public by police reports, that names, pictures, and so forth are a topic of discussion. Whether it be actual news reports or just from people passing around information. It is completely understandable, and unavoidable. And most times the alleged criminal has no invitation to reply or defend themselves, should they even wish to. These things are public by nature.

Of course there is shame in this for the person who allegedly committed the crime. I hate to say this, but sometimes it is funny. Not always. I don't see this as a funny situation. It's really sad. And it attracts my attention because it apparently may be a fellow conservative Anabaptist. If that is the case, then this person's actions reflect to a certain extent on me, as a fellow conservative Anabaptist. That is why I find it interesting to try and learn exactly who this person was, what their relationship is to conservative Mennonites, and so forth.

I am not attempting in the least to be malicious or drawing undue attention to this person. But Temp - that ship has sailed. She joined a rowdy group of people trespassing in one of the most prominent and surveilled places in the country, the US Capitol building. I'm sorry - none of us are to blame for drawing publicity to this person's identity or actions. It's ALL on her. I say this with all compassion. She is misguided and needs help, by all appearances.

If this were a person who got arrested for being part of a violent BLM demonstration, would you be as concerned with her privacy and feelings?

[mike]

i never anticipated comparing a headcovering with a MAGA hat before. i’m adjusting to that.
right now, that seems quite a load to put on women/girls, i don’t believe originally intended. i admit confusion.
maybe i’ll get it after awhile.

Head covering equated with MAGA hat? Say what?

i don’t think plain clothing should translate to, “we never make mistakes, we never err.” then be weaponized when errors (or difference of opinion) arise.

Again, say what? Weaponized?

[mike]

I wouldn't be surprised if Jolene Eicher gets probation or some other light sentence.

The reporter who tweeted out the information about her being arrested appears to be following various January 6 cases.

Here he talks about one man who received probation.


Here the DOJ is pursuing 60 days home detention.




Here's one where the DOJ wants three years of probation.

[Josh]

It would be good to see the government refrain from throwing more people in solitary confinement for a year like they did last year. Political prisons and political prisoners aren't a good thing.

[Szdfan]

if she is guilty, then so be it.
either way, i don’t think she (or others in plain clothing criticized for, ex., legally standing on a roadside) should be identified and discussed, laughed at, etc., without opp or invitation to explain or reply. (in general, not on this one topic.) if they’re not invited or not wanted here, ok. but they shouldn’t be (named+shamed) without representation.

It happens constantly that people who commit crimes (allegedly, of course, which is what is always the case prior to conviction) where the evidence is either already public or made public by police reports, that names, pictures, and so forth are a topic of discussion. Whether it be actual news reports or just from people passing around information. It is completely understandable, and unavoidable. And most times the alleged criminal has no invitation to reply or defend themselves, should they even wish to. These things are public by nature.

Of course there is shame in this for the person who allegedly committed the crime. I hate to say this, but sometimes it is funny. Not always. I don't see this as a funny situation. It's really sad. And it attracts my attention because it apparently may be a fellow conservative Anabaptist. If that is the case, then this person's actions reflect to a certain extent on me, as a fellow conservative Anabaptist. That is why I find it interesting to try and learn exactly who this person was, what their relationship is to conservative Mennonites, and so forth.

The reason I brought this up was because Eicher is a CA or at least as connections to the CA, which is a matter of interest to people here on MN. Eicher didn't stand by the side of a road with a sign, she climbed through a window into the Capitol in the middle of a riot.

Eicher's father, Jerry Eicher, posted about her arrest on Facebook. He's apparently an author of Amish romance-type novels.

[Josh]

The reason I brought this up was because Eicher is a CA or at least as connections to the CA, which is a matter of interest to people here on MN. Eicher didn't stand by the side of a road with a sign, she climbed through a window into the Capitol in the middle of a riot.

Correction: it was a mostly peaceful protest, not a riot.

And no, she isn't a "CA" by the definitions any of us use. Participating in political protests and wearing pants (for women) pretty much disqualifies someone from being a plain or conservative Anabaptist. We could call this person either a liberal, or say they have gone wild. I'm afraid you'll have to accept that this person belongs to your affiliation, not mine.

[Szdfan]

Someone might find this interesting.

George Washington University has created an online database of individuals who have been arrested in regards to January 6.

In keeping with our tradition of providing primary source documents to the research community and the public at large, The Program on Extremism has launched a project to create a central database of court records related to the events of January 6, 2021. This page will be updated as additional individuals are charged with criminal activities and new records are introduced into the criminal justice system. You can view today's numbers, check out our interactive visualizations, browse the cases, read our related reports, and download our database below.

https://extremism.gwu.edu/Capitol-Hill-Cases

An interesting statistic is that 77% of those charged were charged using evidence from their and others' social media accounts.