Evidently the letter he sent to the mosque wasn't as threatening as it was originally made out to be. There are still questionable freedom of speech issues about this case, but anyway Harrison is free. An update on this story. "DA drops Tulsa man's hate-crime charges," by Jerry Wofford for the Tulsa World, January 15:
The district attorney dropped hate-crime charges against a Tulsa man Friday afternoon after a jury decided the evening before that the defendant did not need involuntary mental-health treatment.Jesse Quinn Harrison was charged Dec. 28 with transmitting a threatening letter and with malicious intimidation or harassment.
The charges were based on a package he had sent to the Peace Academy at the Islamic Society of Tulsa. The package included a letter and a video he had made of himself smearing a Quran and an image of an Islamic religious figure with pork chops and grilling those items.
A mental-health hearing ended Thursday with a jury's deciding that Harrison was not "in need of treatment," according to the verdict.
Because Harrison - who had been a patient at the Tulsa Center for Behavioral Health - still faced the criminal charges, he was arrested and booked into the Tulsa Jail after the verdict. After the charges were dismissed, he was released from jail Friday, records show.
Tulsa County District Attorney Tim Harris sat in on much of Harrison's mental-health hearing Wednesday and Thursday and said it was a kind of preview of what would be presented in a criminal case. He said he could see how the evidence would be presented and heard Harrison's explanation of the video and letter submitted as evidence for the first time.
"After listening to him - though I don't agree with the jury's decision - it does give you some insight into where he was coming from," Harris said Friday.
Harrison testified Thursday that by posting the video - which he acknowledged was "horribly offensive" - to YouTube and Facebook, he hoped to show that Islam was a peaceful religion despite a prevailing stereotype to the contrary.
"I created this horribly offensive video, yet what so many people expected was for Muslims to act violent to me," Harrison testified. "Despite this horrible offense, they continue to be a law-abiding, peaceful people."
Harris said that although Harrison is "going about it in a way I don't concur with," it would be difficult to prove that he intended violence toward anyone but possibly himself.
"The issues to be litigated in the criminal case were addressed in the mental-health case," Harris said.
He added that before he decided to drop the charges, he spoke with Islamic Society of Tulsa leaders, two of whom testified Wednesday.
"They did not believe Mr. Harrison's incarceration would serve long-term purposes," Harris said....
I.e., it would reveal too much about our war against the freedom of speech, so let the poor devil go.
Chandler, Arizona: On Saturday, January 15, 2011, I attended the annual "Multicultural Festival" which was located on public property outside of the main branch of the Chandler Public Library. In addition to food, music, and booths devoted to various ethnic groups in the city, there were two separately located booths manned by delegates from moslem groups, with signs offering korans for anyone willing to take one. They did not indicate exactly where they were from, though there is a recently opened mosk not far from the festivities over near Erie Street. As I walked through the festival, I noted that there were no Christian churches or Jewish synagogues represented at the festival. Is this not a violation of the separation of church and state? Is the moslem faith a religion or a culture? Has anyone run into a similar situation?
Greetings:
Once again, repeat after me, the process is the punishment. The mental health "trial" would have made Uncle Joe Stalin proud.
Harrison testified Thursday that by posting the video - which he acknowledged was "horribly offensive" - to YouTube and Facebook, he hoped to show that Islam was a peaceful religion despite a prevailing stereotype to the contrary.
So he is actually a dhimmi and a useful idiot in support of Islam, he may not be crazy, but he is mentally ill...
He'll get death threats, wait and see. He is lying to save his ass from the fire . . .
The process itself does not sound too bad.
We want to prevent the sort of "lone wolf" attack that happened in Tucson. It might be necessary for people exhibiting outlandish, though legal, behavior, to expect to be evaluated for public safety. In fact, Harrison had the opportunity to appear in front of a jury, which decided he was no threat. I would rather have some people inconvenienced than have another assassination attempt. The full rights of the person evaluated must be observed, including not being given any drugs involuntarily until assessed by a jury and judge, and the right to a very speedy resolution.
The truly outrageous behavior was by the DA, who saw fit to consult with an Islamic organization to determine whether an action of a US citizen was legal or not. What was the legal rationale for using the opinion of representatives of the Islamic Society of Tulsa to decide if charges should be pressed?
Agreed RolandB. .DA Harris did not agree with the jury's verdict. .and Harrison's subsequent 'apology' has the odor of a plea-bargain.
This is exactly why Liberal means anything but. Historically all forms of socialism have reduced rights, and the ruling elites - nearly of whom are Geezers stand against free speech where it's needed most: controversial subjects.
Islam is the most important and controversial subject of all.
For example, when will the NYPD arrest Piss Chist Madonna for her symbolic act?
"Harrison testified Thursday that by posting the video - which he acknowledged was "horribly offensive" - to YouTube and Facebook, he hoped to show that Islam was a peaceful religion despite a prevailing stereotype to the contrary."
Did you see his video?
Plea bargain.
Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with peace. You hear that, defense attorney?
WHAT?!
Am I reading this correctly?
Did my erstwhile hero (Harrison) actually say these things?
I must assume that he did. He pulled a "Molly Norris".
Thank you very much, DIPSH*t.
"The charges were based on a package he had sent to the Peace Academy at the Islamic Society of Tulsa"
The fact that the charges were dropped indicates pretty clearly that the "package" (video and letter) did not contain any threat. The only thing that could even remotely be construed as threatening was the first Merle Haggard song (The Fightin' Side of Me) in the video, but that's not a threat. (I take it the Tulsa DA is not planning on prosecuting Merle Haggard).
I don't have much of a problem with the video. It's not the approach I would take, but there is in fact an established genre of provocative "artistic" violation of religious taboos and political commentary. It is arguable, and subjective, as to whether it is in bad taste. It contains no threat.
In the video, Harrison transgresses a few of the taboos of orthodox Islam (damaging a Quran, pork, dog and dog saliva, reference to alcohol in one of the songs), and makes use of an insult known in Arab culture (removing a shoe and using it to strike or tamp down the pork onto the Quran fragments). Of these, damaging a Quran would alone be considered grounds for the death penalty in orthodox Islam. He includes two Merle Haggard songs, some visual references to the 9/11 attacks and to one of the victims.
That he should send this package to the Islamic Society of Tulsa (IST) is, in itself, no more threatening than would be the IST sending him a Quran, or inviting him to accept Islam. (Indeed, an invitation to accept Islam itself can be taken as a conditional, veiled threat, e.g., see Muhammad's "embrace Islam and you will be safe"; and see the classic jihad policy toward non-Muslims. Whether any individual Muslim today intends to make such a conditional implied threat in inviting a non-Muslim to Islam is another matter). A case could be made that the material posted and recommended on the IST's website is far more concerning than any of Harrison's mere transgressions of superstitious taboos.
For example, the IST recommends reading the Quran (!). Not only that, but they recommend Ibn Kathir's tafsir of the Quran, which is certainly not a moderate interpretation. On the contrary, Ibn Kathir's tafsir, which among other things plausibly links up relevant hadiths and parts of the Sira to the appropriate Quranic verses, is entirely consistent with the interpretations underlying classical military jihad and sharia, including the subjugation of non-Muslims.
If you go to
http://www.istulsa.org/quranonline.html
and then click on Classes and Programs, and then go to Quran Tutorials
http://www.istulsa.org/QuranOnline.html
then you will see the Ibn Kathir link
http://www.tafsir.com/
Also, similar problems arise when one looks at the IST's "recommended websites." Right away, on the first of their links I clicked on
http://www.islaam.com/
, was a reference to "Imam Ibn ul Qayyim al Jawziyyah," i.e., Ibn Qayyim, who was Ibn Kathir's teacher, and who held similar views on jihad and sharia. For example, Qayyim considered it acceptable for jihadists to have sex with the non-Muslim female captives and slaves.
One must ask, why is a supposedly peaceful organization advocating such harsh medieval Islamic views?
I wrote: "an insult known in Arab culture (removing a shoe and using it to strike or tamp down the pork onto the Quran fragments)."
That is, Harrison made use of that "removing a shoe and using to strike" insult and applied it in a way that is insulting to Islam, i.e., by tamping down the pork against the Quran fragments.
the Da should be sued for violating Mr. Harrison's RIGHT to freedom of speech and religion! There was nothing in his video that would allow such charges to be made and there must not have been any threats against ANYONE PERSONALLY IN HIS LETTERS EITHER!!
I think that Harrison is crazy like a fox. He used Muslim strategy, which is to say he did what he wanted and then lied about it. He might be accidently brilliant, but brilliant he is. Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. Sometimes you have to fight lies with lies. At some point you realize that behaving honorably toward a dishonorable opponent is a losing strategy. So Mr. Harrison threw a pork chop on the fire and said, "I dare you." No doubt the Muslims in Harrison's neighborhood will be scratching their collective heads for some time to come. And guess what? If Mr. Harrison wanted to, he can wear a tee shirt with a picture of a pork chop on top of the Koran, and with a wink and a nod he can say, "I'm wearing this because I care about you."
I agree, they probably made it a condition for his release that he made that admittance.
I just hope his dog is ok after eating that pork chop that was defiled by the quran. That would leave a bitter taste in my mouth if I had eaten that.
We want to prevent the sort of "lone wolf" attack that happened in Tucson.
*** 87:10 ***
He who fears will mind.
In other words, to prevent the sort of "lone wolf" attack that happened in Tucson, we should retire the First Amendment, and in so doing absent a consitutional convention would in effect abrogate the Constitution in its entirety.
Wouldn't that be the self-defeating chicken sheet thing to do?
Nevertheless, if he engaged in such complex subterfuge, surely he would have made it known to the world-at-large, don't you think, given his internet stardom, if not his erstwhile and feckless "convictions"?
If not, what was his original motivation?
"Revenge does not serve its purpose, lest the aggrieved party makes it apparent".
I think it's Shakespeare or Poe. It has to do with wine and bricks.
Mr. Poe died of alcoholism. Mr. Shakespeare was an alien who came from the same planet that Mr. Einstein came from. These latter two did not have the same wiring as you and me. I suspect that "revenge" is too simple a term for Mr. Harrison's motives. I believe he was "fed up," hence, the pork chop. I think he was playing it by ear and had no plan at all. Also, one can obtain secret delight in knowing that a whole host of cowards, lyers and beaurocrats have been snookered. One small step for man. One giant step for Mr. Harrison.
I agree, he's lying about his motives. He just realized that he was in much more trouble than he had planned and is trying to find a way out.
It is good that Harrison is free. It is a small victory for free speech. Even small victories should be celebrated.
Hi Susan.
Just for your interest, there seems to be a growing body of evidence to suggest the primary cause of Poe's death was gas poisoning. Absolutely; alcohol was a problem for him, especially during his editorial days, during which time the man made many enemies with his writings. But you're right - the alcohol certainly hastened his demise.
I'm not sure I understand you, though, about "us not being wired like the latter two" (Shakespeare/Einstein). I get it that you and I are no luminaries such as are they - but the point I was making was that Harrison (mentally ill or not) sought to exact a sort of videographic "revenge" for Muslims causing him, apparently, personal irritation. It's just my opinion.
But if he was seeking a sort of revenge, then the walking back of his previous actions and statements makes no immediate sense to me, simply because I don't perceive that Mr. Harrison is clever enough to pull off the level of deception that has been referred to elsewhere in this thread, and that I believe for which you assign a certain credibility. Mr. Harrison, after all, clearly does not know his enemy.
deebartok, when you say that Mr. Harrison does not know his enemy, can you be more specific? He knew enough about them to provoke them. He knew that they kill people. What didn't he know?
Hi Susan-
Not to be picking nits but:
I think it was Sun Tzu who opined on the subject, saying something to the effect that "one should know one's enemy" and that "if your enemy angers easily, seek to irritate him".
I think he got it slightly wrong. Knowing one's enemies and understanding them are two, debateably, different notions.
Any decent warrior knows that finding (identifying the target) is half the battle. Understanding how to kill or offend them is another matter entirely.
The legal strategy regarding intent helped his case and prevented the free speech issue from being met head-on in a publicized case. What is scary is that the Prosecutor consulted two prominent Muslim leaders (Imams?) before dropping the charges.