I’m a parent… Not only NO… BUT HEEELLLLLL NO !!!!!😡😡😡
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (35)
sorted by:
Actually the crime was trespassing, as she was suspended for not wearing a mask - but wanted to go to school anyway.
Pretty epic. Great girl. 10/10.
Rosa Parks wouldn't take the back seat either. This is how it builds.
Then the next question her lawyers need to ask:
"Why was she arrested for trespassing, but not for endangering public health/safety?"
"If you are not concerned with the 'endangering public health/safety' by not wearing a mask, then the trespassing charge turns to dust. The only reason she would be trespassing is if she was endangering public health, but clearly you don't believe that so you had to connect it to 'trespassing' "
"... Charge her with endangering public health/safety, if you do not, then she was not trespassing. If you wish to try and charge her with that, go ahead, we will win that case too, with actual facts about the lack of efficacy of masks."
I did a deep dive on all the mask related arrests, most of them were trespassing, none were in regards to 'endangering public health and safety'. It's all smoke and mirrors. They never had a court case about the lack of efficacy of masks, otherwise the whole mask thing would have vanished almost immediately. They put in place these rules and then block you from attacking the actual core of their argument in court - endangering public safety via not wearing a mask. It's pure evil.
I'd certainly like TV coverage of her case.
Thing is, she had plenty of time to leave. The officer who arrested her gave her a ton of time. Was hilarious about it too, when he made the arrest he asked her, "Do you have any concealed weapons, like assault rifles or bazookas?"
So from a technical standpoint, she kind of has no ground to stand on for the actual charge she was given. They have to find a way to counter-sue or something, I dunno.