Georgia Charges 'Cop City' Protesters Under RICO Law Used To Indict Trump
Among the indicted are a Southern Poverty Law Center attorney acting as a legal observer and three people who run a bail fund.

Activists have spent two years protesting the construction of a police training center southeast of Atlanta. The city plans to build the facility, which protesters have dubbed "Cop City," on state-owned forested land, and activists have resorted to various tactics—including, in some cases, violence—in opposition.
This week, Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr announced charges for 61 protesters under the state's Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The indictment claims the defendants are all part of a criminal enterprise called Defend the Atlanta Forest. Included among the indicted defendants are a Southern Poverty Law Center attorney who was arrested while acting as a legal observer and three people who run a bail fund.
The indictments come less than a month after Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis charged former President Donald Trump and 18 co-defendants under the same law; in fact, as the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported, the same grand jury that issued the indictments against Trump was also involved in the indictments against Cop City protesters. While Willis' use of the statute against Trump was overly broad and likely criminalized constitutionally protected speech, the state's charges against protesters could be even worse.
According to the indictment, Defend the Atlanta Forest is "a self-identified coalition and enterprise of militant anarchists, eco-activists, and community organizers" and an "anarchist, anti-police, and environmental activism organization." The filing even defines anarchy, which it calls "a philosophy that is opposed to forms of authority or hierarchy" that "primarily targets government because it views government as unnecessarily oppressive." It then goes on to define terms like collectivism, mutual aid, and social solidarity as "major ideas that anarchists promote."
"Instead of relying on a modicum of government structure, anarchy relies on human association instead of government to fulfill all human needs," it continues. "Anarchists often point to law enforcement as one of the chief violent actors, and they accuse the government of using law enforcement to oppress societal change, and they view the structure of government as inherently oppressive and violent."
In this case, activists cite one incident in particular: the January shooting death of Manuel "Tortuguita" Paez Terán, a protester, by law enforcement. At the time, state officials claimed the protester had shot a state trooper and was killed when other officers returned fire. But the official autopsy found no gunpowder residue on Paez Terán's hands.
To say that the indictment paints with a broad brush is an understatement. Prosecutors speak about "militant anarchists" and their tactics but also spend a considerable amount of time describing conduct that is clearly protected speech. "Defend the Atlanta Forest anarchists target and recruit individuals with a certain personal profile," the filing alleges. "Once these individuals have been recruited, members of Defend the Atlanta Forest also promote anarchist ideas through written documents and word of mouth;" such documents "decry capitalism in any form, condemn government, and cast all law enforcement as violent murderers." (All protected speech.)
Some protesters may have committed offenses deserving of prosecution. The indictment alleges a number of violent acts, such as destroying construction equipment and one allegation of "punch[ing] a police officer." Five protesters are charged for burning a police car and destroying private property. But much of the rest of the indictment relies on guilt by association to tie dozens of protesters to a criminal conspiracy, stretching the state's RICO statute past its logical breaking point.
"We are extremely concerned by this breathtakingly broad and unprecedented use of state terrorism, anti-racketeering, and money laundering laws against protesters," said Aamra Ahmad, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, in a statement. "Georgia law enforcement officials are disproportionately wielding these overbroad laws to stigmatize and target those who disagree with the government."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"Some protesters may have committed offenses deserving of prosecution. The indictment alleges a number of violent acts, such as destroying construction equipment and one allegation of "punch[ing] a police officer." Five protesters are charged for burning a police car and destroying private property."
Well, at least there was an underlying crime for this one.
Was this the same grand jury that indicted Trump, or another in the same area?
Same grand jury, but different prosecutor. Trump got the Fulton County DA, and the forest people got the state AG.
The local DA, which wasn't Fulton County, declined to present the case, which is why the AG stepped in.
That makes more sense.
So much politicization of the judicial system by those on the Left. This wont end well, especially because those of us with eyes to see, clearly see the BS.
Georgia RICO targets:
Cop city protestors
Young Thug
Atlanta Teacher cheating scandal
Thug Donnie
Will they go after creeps who post links to cp on Reason next?
No. And this is why he served Soros, who undoubtedly promised him all the prepubescent rectums he can rape.
"the January shooting death of Manuel "Tortuguita" Paez Terán, a protester, by law enforcement. At the time, state officials claimed the protester had shot a state trooper and was killed when other officers returned fire. But the official autopsy found no gunpowder residue on Paez Terán's hands."
Once again: Terán's pistol had been fired, a Trooper was shot and injured, the bullet recovered from the Trooper's wound was fired from Terán's pistol. If Reason is alleging that the Georgia Troopers deliberately shot and injured one of their own in order to cover up a murder, then they should come out and say it.
And if Reason is not willing to openly make such accusations then they should show the integrity to stop making insinuations.
As I note below, the link that Lancaster uses to support his contention is actually corrected to say EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE: namely that Teran's hands WERE found to have gunshot primer residue on them after lab testing.
The hilarious bit is that ENB (in the linked article) was trying to dunk on the press for just "running with the story" that was given to them about Teran shooting an officer. In fact she was the one coming to hasty conclusions- taking the coroner's report of what was visible and extrapolating it to disprove the Police story. But a few days later, when the lab results came back, she was proven wrong.
Narratives would never be blindly pushed by Reason!
Nah, you have to pay them to do that.
Have a Koch and a smile!
Teran’s hands WERE found to have gunshot primer residue on them after lab testing.
Is... this what I think it is?
They trespassed, engaged in in arson, and shot a state trooper. This was not a protest. It was a planned act of terrorism. Yes, the RICO indictment includes actions that in other contexts are innocuous. Yes, recruiting people to a protest is constitutionally protected. Recruiting people to participate in your conspiracy to comit a crime is not. This sort of thing is exactly what the RICO laws were written to be used against.
Planned act? Yes. Criminal? Yes. Terrorism? No. RICO? Hell, no.
And, yes, I will agree that RICO laws were written to be used for the illegitimate purpose of criminalizing otherwise non-criminal acts. You do not do your case any good by advertising that point.
What exactly is not criminal about a conspiracy to commit arson, tresspass and shooting a state policeman?
No one was there to protest anything. They were there to occupy and burn the place down. There was nothing about it that wasn't criminal.
The intention for RICO was to be used for long running criminal enterprises, not single use events. I dont think a singular long lasting protest falls under RICO.
Well, you're in luck, then, because these people are part of Antifa, a long running criminal enterprise.
wait, the same grand jury that indicted Trump did something similar to a group of fringe lefties? how dare they ruin the MAGA talking points like that.
It’s almost like they’re just fucking idiots who go along with indicting a ham sandwich because a fancy lawyer said to.
or at least that RICO laws have definitely evolved beyond the original intent of the law.
That too.
"hey ... get these guys too so both sides. thanks, grand jury" ~~ GA AG
Could someone please turn off Mr. Lancaster's ventilator and allow his brain-dead corpse to die with dignity?
Boo fuckity hoo.
Hey, Lancaster, why can't you just admit that your side did something wrong?
Admitting to being on a side, might require an atom of character.
So raising bail funds for those who rioted in Minneapolis, Kenosha, and Portland....
"... while acting as a legal observer..."
So, not legally representing anyone present, you say?
Meaning, not being bound by privilege and as an officer of the court he has a duty to report any illegal act he may have witnessed.
Failure to report making him less an observer and more of a consiprator.
Also, a reminder that Trump's own legal counsel is facing charges.
Again, this is HOW BAD the editing is at Reason.
"But the official autopsy found no gunpowder residue on Paez Terán's hands."
Follow that link. You will find that this is actually a disingenuous statement. First, no gunpowder residue was SEEN by the coroner on Teran's hands. By substituting "found" for "seen", Lancaster is implying that the statement from the coroner was the result of full testing. It was not, it was only the result of a visual inspection.
Even worse, you will find at that link that ENB's post was later updated to note that lab results in fact DID find gun primer residue (not gunpowder, but PRIMER) on his hands. This of course destroys ENB's narrative in that article out the window. Good on ENB for issuing the correction (though she emphatically points out that it is possible for primer residue to end up on a person's hand for reasons other than firing a gun- a level of nuance she was unwilling to show when she thought the lack of residue was effective evidence against her preferred narrative).
But Lancaster, and his editor, do not include this corrected information. His statement that no residue was "found" is flat out incorrect. And that is why you are supposed to have editors- to catch shit like this.
I don't know the exact circumstances of this case, but I do know that Lancaster has already mischaracterized one aspect of it. And I note that while he spends a couple paragraphs insisting that the indictment is flimsy and based on "protected speech", he also doesn't link to the actual indictment- just a press release. Given his perfidy regarding Teran, I'm left to assume that he is being disingenuous about the indictment as well.
Lancaster is a few years out from his internship. I expect a little better of him, but the real disappointment is the editorial staff who continue to fail him to embarrassing effect.
And that is why you are supposed to have editors- to catch shit like this.
Disagree. This is why you’re supposed to have personal standards and ethics. Editors help, but they are not and cannot be sole-source.
If you wouldn't want someone saying you were shot with GSR on your hands when you didn't have any, you should be clear about someone else claimed to have been shot without GSR on their hands when there was, in fact, GSR there.
I am 90% certain Lancaster only remembered what he originally read, and never learned that the story changed a little later. He did a search for the story, and linked it. He was lazy and didn't read through the article to find that his read was incorrect. This is standard lazy lack of detail oriented thinking.
I'm 100% certain that between Joe and ENB the problem is/was mendacious laziness, an assembly of behaviors that I don't believe can be resolved by simply throwing an editor at the problem.
editor w/a cattle prod?
Isn't this the same group that is made up of people who mostly don't even live in Georgia. I'm pretty sure that there were some Europeans and Canadians in the mix.
No mention of them being held in solitary without bail?
No perp counts by race?
What the hell kind of reporting is this?
Once you crack open the "protesting is organized crime" nut - you can't uncrack it. Going forward more people are going to seriously consider just murdering the people they are unhappy with. They might even do less time.
They wanted initiation of force. Wish granted!
"We are extremely concerned by this breathtakingly broad and unprecedented use of state terrorism, anti-racketeering, and money laundering laws against non-Republicans."
Kinda hard to feel for them when they are notoriously silent when their side is going after people they do not like.
"We are extremely concerned by this breathtakingly broad and unprecedented use of state terrorism, anti-racketeering, and money laundering laws against protesters," said Aamra Ahmad, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, in a statement. "Georgia law enforcement officials are disproportionately wielding these overbroad laws to stigmatize and target those who disagree with the government."
So...does that mean that the ACLU will defend Trump?
What’s good for the goose is good for the non-binary, gender-neutral being of the avian persuasion.
Poor misunderstood militant anarchist commies...
Poor misunderstood militant nationalsocialist morons...
My schadenfreude to all of them. Go Calico Cat, git 'm Gingham Dog!
Welcome to Demunazi State of Amerika.
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Newsflash: It was other socialists who came for the socialists ans the trade unionists.
FOAD lefties
Sorry, expecting empathy here is a stretch.
Only way to fix bad laws is to force all people to abide by them.
The police should be charged with dereliction of duty for not capping that SPLC/ National Lawyers Guild faggot.
Should Georgia Republicans have utilized RICO laws against these protesters? Probably not. But it was not Republicans who opened this Pandora's Box. Fani Willis cracked that box wide open. Actions result in reactions. Let us lay the blame where it belongs. When you use the hammer of the government against your rivals, DO NOT be surprised when your rival picks up a similar hammer.
How’s that sauce for the goose tasting?