Fox News reports nine of the roughly 300 BLM activists who were captured on video protesting on a St. Louis couple’s property have been cited for trespassing. One of them tweeted her bemusement at being held accountable.
I was just sent a summons to appear in court for “trespassing on private property” on Portland Pl aka the street Patricia and Mark McCloskey live on. I had a gun waved in my face by them but trespassing is what matters?
— Ohun Ashe 🌻🌼🌞 (@Ohun_Ashe) September 4, 2020
Ashe should look up Missouri’s castle law. It’s broad for property owners who feel threatened by anyone who is not legally on their property. None of the 300 or so protesters had the right to be on the McCloskeys’ property that day. They didn’t have the right to break the security gate leading into the neighborhood.
People do have the right, enshrined in the Second Amendment, to own firearms, and Missouri’s law recognizes the natural right of self-defense.
Missouri recognizes the “castle doctrine” and allows residents to use force against intruders, without the duty to retreat, based on the notion that your home is your “castle.” This legal doctrine assumes that if an invader disrupts the sanctity of your home, they intend to do you harm and therefore you should be able to repel their advances.
Given what had happened to retired police captain David Dorn in St. Louis, the threat the McCloskeys felt due to the presence of protesters suddenly showing up on their property was undoubtedly real. Rioters murdered Dorn and looted his store, and Democrats said nothing about his death at all. They were either afraid to challenge BLM and antifa, or rated the two far-left groups more highly than the lives of bystanders and the rights of property owners.
By the time of the incident at the McCloskeys, innocents had already been assaulted and murdered, and property had already been burned, looted, and destroyed during the riots across the country. The McCloskeys were among the millions of Americans who have purchased firearms to protect themselves in response to the unrest, which many Democrat-controlled cities were either not effectively stopping or were (and still are) actively fostering.
The trespassing citations may or may not lead to additional charges. But they are likely to change the situation for the McCloskeys. Ashe tweeted this after receiving due backlash for her previous tweet:
Whew for the folks that cant comprehend, this isnt an admittance to trespassing or validating the McCloskey’s story. It’s a comparison of walking down a street vs. threatening folks with a deadly weapon and policing. Police didn’t send the McCloskey’s citations but sent us them.
— Ohun Ashe 🌻🌼🌞 (@Ohun_Ashe) September 12, 2020
The trespassing citations recognize that the protesters were present on the McCloskeys’ property illegally. This should factor into what happens to them.
Ashe must have missed the charges that have been publicly leveled at the McCloskeys. Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner, a Democrat, was very quick to send police to confiscate the McCloskeys’ firearms and hit them with felony charges. That happened in July, and Gardner’s office may have fabricated the means of charging them by manipulating key evidence.
Ashe and the other BLM protesters, in contrast, have only been charged with a minor offense and may face no additional charges.
More protesters who trespass and violate other Americans’ rights should face charges as these nine are. It would help deter additional violence. The more they know they can get away with, the more they will try to get away with.
See: Portland.
Editor’s Note: Want to support PJ Media so we can keep telling the truth about the riots and attacks on law enforcement? Join PJ Media VIP and use the promo code LAWANDORDER for 25% off your VIP membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member