"Pro-Palestine Protester Charged for Threatening to 'Murder' Bakersfield Lawmakers"

"She prioritizes highlighting the intersectionality that comes with the environmental justice movement to achieve collective liberation for all oppressed communities. In her spare time, she enjoys holding elected officials accountable, watching endless amounts of movies, television series and sports, and enjoying time outdoors with her family and friends."

From Bakersfield Now (Jackson Walker):

Officers escorted Riddhi Patel, 28, out of a Thursday meeting of the Bakersfield City Council after she repeatedly threatened death toward councilmembers who were weighing a Gaza ceasefire resolution. Patel spoke out in favor of the resolution, but expressed skepticism toward the council's willingness to pass it.

"I don't have faith that you'll do this," Patel said of the resolution. "You guys are all horrible human beings and Jesus probably would have killed you himself."

Patel, who identifies as non-binary, then threatened a violent uprising if council members chose to oppress their constituents.

"I remind you that these holidays that we practice, that other people in the global south practice, believe in violent revolution against their oppressors and I hope one day somebody brings the guillotine and kills all of you motherf ------," Patel said.

Patel later addressed the council a second time, expressing outrage over the presence of metal detectors at the meeting.

"In the last five years I've attended city council meetings there's never been metal detectors, there's never been more cops," Patel said. "The only reason you're doing it is because people actually don't care if you guys don't like them and they're actually resisting so you're trying to criminalize them."

"We'll see you at your house," they added. "We'll murder you." …

Patel has been charged for the threats, and remains in jail with bail set at $2 million.

For more from Patel, see the Tweets archived here:

Please blacklist this @riddhipatel1025 and don't let her endanger the leaders of Bharat, @NIA_India @HMOIndia @IndianEmbassyUS https://t.co/LQlItfmald pic.twitter.com/zZgLAQx3iE

— Utsav ???????? (@UtsavSanduja) April 13, 2024

The Tweets appear to have come from the @riddhipatel1025 Twitter account that Bakersfield Now indicates was associated with Patel. (It has since been deleted, though you can see an archive of the identification information here; it also links to this page.)

I appreciate that there are many Patels in this world, including in America, and that the photo associated with the Twitter page is somewhat different from the image on the video. But this March 27 Facebook @riddhipatel1025 post, seems to confirm the link suggested by the Bakersfield Now story: The post sought donations for an "emergency bail fund" for "5 folks arrested today at a Bakersfield City Council meeting today after folks have been turning out for MONTHS with United Liberation Front … to demand city council introduce a ceasefire resolution," seems to confirm Bakersfield Now's connection between Patel and @riddhipatel1025. (The United Liberation Front posted an item Wednesday saying that it "unequivocally condemns any statements that threaten public officials," apparently specifically referring to Patel's comments.)

Patel also appears to be (or at least have been) "an economic development coordinator with the Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment (CRPE)"; here's her biography blurb from the CRPE site:

Riddhi joined the Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment in September of 2020. She was born and raised in Bakersfield, CA and attended Stockdale High School. She then went on to achieve a Bachelor of Science in Neuroscience from Saint Louis University in 2017. After returning to Bakersfield in 2019, she began volunteering for the Bernie 2020 campaign where she found organizing. After the campaign ended, she quickly found a home in the Sunrise Movement, co-founding the local Sunrise Movement hub in Kern County with other local organizers.

Through her advocacy for common sense statewide setbacks to protect frontline communities across the state, she found CRPE in the fall of 2020. She prioritizes highlighting the intersectionality that comes with the environmental justice movement to achieve collective liberation for all oppressed communities. In her spare time, she enjoys holding elected officials accountable, watching endless amounts of movies, television series and sports, and enjoying time outdoors with her family and friends.

Comments

[Longtobefree]

Never mind the southern border, put a fence around California.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Land of the fruit and the nut...

[TwelveInchPianist]

Not sure what this has to do with Mexico, I have it on good authority that Bakersfield is three days away from the border.

[Kazinski]

She probably didn’t completely cross the line until “We’ll see you at your house,” they added. “We’ll murder you.”

A good example of the proper use of the pronoun “they”, she’s her own mob.

But I can see why she is so passionate: the world is just one non-binding resolution by the Bakersfield City Council away from ending the terrible war in Gaza.

[TwelveInchPianist]

If they really cared, they'd make it binding.

[David Nieporent]

But I can see why she is so passionate: the world is just one non-binding resolution by the Bakersfield City Council away from ending the terrible war in Gaza.

That's of course the cherry on top: that she's so concerned about accomplishing something with less geopolitical significance than a sneeze. But her "I'm going to come to your house and murder you" rant wasn't even about the resolution; it was about the fact that there were metal detectors to get into the meeting, which she bizarrely called "criminalizing" things.

[Bwaaah]

It seems to me that “We’ll see you at hour house” is different from “I’ll see you at your house.” Similarly, “We’ll murder you” seems different from “I’ll murder you.”

She doesn’t seem to be accompanied by any associates. She seems to be speaking for herself. Her demeanor, though angry in tone and voice, does not present to me as physically aggressive.

Her threats sounded more rhetorical than imminent, though I can’t say for sure.

I’m just saying: I think we should kill her.

(And I don’t think she should feel threatened by that.)
Here she is: https://youtu.be/Z_ZXZTaKbQI?t=2926

[Bwaaah]

Correction: We're going to kill her.

(I still don't think she should fee threatened by that.)

[MikeFr]

Please do not misgender Patel. They is nonbinary. So if their third person is they presumably their first person is we and they was possibly making a personal threat.

They apparently contains multitudes, both pronoun wise and mental health wise.

[Cyclops]

"It seems to me that “We’ll see you at your house” is different from “I’ll see you at your house.”

Unless the person making the statement is a "non-binary person" (such as Patel) who uses plural pronouns in place of grammatically correct singular pronouns. In such a case the statement "We'll see you at your house" is the woke-grammer equivalent of "I'll see you at your house.".

[Bwaaah]

Interesting. If she meant "I" by using the pronoun "we," then that would negate my point.

[Longtobefree]

Mark 5:9
“What is your name?” He asked him. “My name is Legion,” he answered Him, “because we are many.”

[Bob from Ohio]

"“non-binary person” "

Her female side must have came out at the arraignment when she cried like a baby.

[Bwaaah]

I dunno. I get the feeling that sometimes she cries, and sometimes she spits.

[The Drill SGT]

Patel, I don't take a position on Patel's genders, is woke, apparently identified as female at birth, and certifiable. As such Patel, can flit between genders at will.

it's in the rules

[Vryedni]

Wife: Please take out the trash.

Me: I prioritize highlighting the intersectionality that comes with the environmental justice movement to achieve collective liberation for all oppressed communities. You do it.

[TwelveInchPianist]

If she walked away four seconds earlier, it would have been protected speech.

[TwelveInchPianist]

She might not be guilty.
Seems too conditional and not immediate enought for this, and I doubt that she had the intent that her threat would cause the council members to vote differently.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Seems like she's pretty clearly guilty of this, though.

[Kleppe]

Why is the author letting this mentally ill person bully him into using her preferred pronouns?

[TwelveInchPianist]

He’s outnumbered?

[Sarcastr0]

Abstaining from picking a stupid collateral fight is a sign of strength, actually.

[TwelveInchPianist]

That's true.

[Currentsitguy]

I'd say just ignore their weird requests. Don't feed attention seeking behavior.

[Sarcastr0]

Call them they and that’s the end of it. No attention.

Being a dick because you have decided the request is weird and you are the story.

You rationalize self indulgence.

[Currentsitguy]

That would be true only if you engage with them. Don't. I don't need to hear what you call yourself to know what you are, and any attempt to derail any exchange will simply be roundly ignored.

Just like a young child having a tantrum it's best to just let them scream and ignore them so they learn it doesn't work and nobody cares and that your behavior will get you nothing.

No argument, no discussion, no exchange. Just continue on as if they never even spoke.

[Sarcastr0]

That is even more self indulgent and would definitely make you a story.

[Nige]

I mean, you're the one throwing the tantrum here.

[bernard11]

"We'll see you at your house," they added. "We'll murder you." …

It took me a minute to realize that the "they" refers to Patel. At first I thought the threat came from the Council. If the reporter felt that using "she" instead would be betraying the revolution then how about just using the name.

""We'll see you at your house," Patel added. "We'll murder you." …

Much clearer.

[Area Man]

I’m generally (though not always) sympathetic towards and aligned with the trans movement. Or at the very least I’m not hostile towards it.

That said, it greatly annoys me when an individual’s pronouns are they/them/their. The singular they has its place, but not for a specific individual. It only causes confusion. It wouldn’t have been (or, even today, be) hard to come up with a neutral pronoun, similar to how a neutral honorific for a woman (Ms.) or nonbinary person (Mx.) was thought up.

[Sarcastr0]

Maybe it’s because I’m a bit younger but a I’ve taken to it okay. The ambiguity between singular and plural doesn’t come up that much given context.

But yeah, it’s an adjustment. And even the well disposed find it difficult.

Better than xhe xer tho.

[Absaroka]

Seems the opposite to me. Simple word substitution doesn't introduce any ambiguity; we're used to dealing with synonyms. Pooch, dog, pup, mutt, whatever, it's all unambiguous.

But singular/plural matters.

"I asked Bob and Carol to dinner, and she said she would come"
"I asked Bob and Carol to dinner, and they said they would come"

Until recently, you knew how many people were coming to dinner.

This is the inverse of a the singular/plural problem in standard English - if you walk into a room of people and say 'You are invited to dinner', no one knows how many people are invited. And so every region invents a work-around (youse guys, y'all, ...) to remove the ambiguity. Making they and we singular is a step backwards.

Xe or whatever seems a little silly to me; we shouldn't need a different pronoun for 'prefers blonds' or 'is a leg man' - but at least going down that path let's you know how many people are coming to dinner.

[Scooter]

Just goes to reinforce that crazy people can be dangerous. If the police wind up using deadly force on a person who is mentally ill, it is not automatically inappropriate. Nor is it automatically appropriate.

Given the recent findings of the Cass Study, it seems the more appropriate initial treatment for people claiming to be 'non-binary' or 'transgender' is intensive psychotherapy rather than immediate application of puberty blockers and/or cross-sex hormones.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

What did Patel do that was "dangerous"?

Presumably, you mean more "dangerous" than threatening speech.

[Scooter]

She made a verbal threat. Some people that make verbal threats intend to carry out that threat. Some don't. Listening to her, she's clearly unbalanced and history tells us some unbalanced people can be dangerous.

[Nige]

'Given the recent findings of the Cass Study'

Oh boy.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The right-wing law prof
-- soon-to-be-former law prof --
tosses the red meat

[TwelveInchPianist]

Strong words from a former lawyer.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

You may be confusing me with disgraced, un-American conservative John Eastman or, perhaps, disgraced conservative Alex Kozinski.

(I do not know whether Kozinski has his law license. For all I know, he may be representing discredited, old-timey, on-the-spectrum, right-wing misogynists.)

[Noscitur a sociis]

Kosinski has indeed continued practicing law since resigning, including representing Donald Trump.

https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/video/?20231004/22-15961/

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Kozinski and Trump . . . a natural pairing.

[Commenter_XY]

Haiku skills need a little work, Arthur. Maybe snappier? 🙂

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I wouldn’t change a word.

[gVOR08]

Death threats and meeting disruptions seem to be pretty common these days. Politicians receive threats almost routinely. Judges issue restraining orders trying to protect prosecutors and their own staff and families. The subject episode seems pretty routine. The only real question is why Volokh wants to elevate what seems to be a local Bakersfield story. The answer seems moderately obvious.

[Bwaaah]

"The only real question is why Volokh wants to elevate what seems to be a local Bakersfield story. The answer seems moderately obvious."

It's not obvious to me. I can think of a bunch of reasons he'd cover it. What do you think is the obvious reason he's covering this story?

[Kazinski]

The answer of course is EV specializes in 1st Amendment law and the line between protected speech and true threats.

For instance here is a post from last year which seem very on point:
“S. Ct. Decides: “True Threats” Exception Requires Showing that Speaker Was “Reckless,” i.e.,”consciously disregarded a substantial risk that his communications would be viewed as threatening violence.”
https://reason.com/volokh/2023/06/27/s-ct-decides-true-threats-exception-requires-showing-that-speaker-was-reckless-i-e/

Oh, and in that case he filed an Amicus brief, not just a blog post, however “obvious” the reason was.

You seem to think it was something else other than his academic specialty l, but you’d be wrong.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-138/262469/20230331130414326_22-138%20merits%20bsac%201A%20Scholars.pdf

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Is this guy ignoring the professor’s motivation, or is far enough along the spectrum not to get it?

[Bwaaah]

I admit that the reason you gave was, to me, THE MOST OBVIOUS REASON.

Some people, for their own reasons, zoom right past that one.

(Angry people often presume malice in others as a pretext for their own malevolent positions.)

[Frank Drackman]

Where's Officer Michael Byrd when you really need him?

[Dr. Ed 2]

If she is going to make a fuss like this over this, gotta wonder what her ilk are going to do when they realize that we are shooting down Iranian drones over Syria before they can get to Israel....

[vaadu]

Was she born in the US? If not, kick her out after she does her time.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

Yes, people don't usually realize that there are two types of citizen, native born and naturalized. The former are the "first class" citizens, and the latter are the "second class" citizens, who are subject to losing their citizenship and being deported for any criminal violation.

But I'm sure we can improve upon that if we think about it. Maybe we can exclude second-class citizens from voting, or serving on juries? Or, better yet, if they're so keen on replacing us, make them pay all the taxes!

[Krayt]

"You guys are all horrible human beings and Jesus probably would have killed you himself."

Just like Jesus got wood at the thought of that single mom getting snagged on the razor wire in the Rio Grande and drowning with her two kids.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Christians for the loss!

As usual.

Carry on, superstitious clingers.

[Commenter_XY]

Does this Non-Binary's speech and conduct cross the line that Counterman established? Seems pretty reckless to me. In no world is it acceptable to threaten to murder public officials in a public meeting.

The alternative is that 'They' is mentally disturbed (Uh, she has a screw loose), and needs a lot of psychological help (Yes, definitely).

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

They should have confined their speech to the topic of woodchippers. That's perfectly normal and rational.

(At least, if the Reason comments section is any guide.)

[Jonathan Affleck]

An in-person threat more easily reaches the bar of true threat than an online threat that one user makes against another user that may be hundreds of miles away.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Where was Prof. Volokh when this was happening?

Maybe so engrossed in a trans fetish he missed it?

[Letters_Triumverate]

Boy, you're really shitposting up a storm in these comments. Something about the story must have you way more triggered than usual.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Shitposting begets shitposting?

[Letters_Triumverate]

Shitposting begats
Shitposting begats shitpost...
...ing, begats shit.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Care to discuss what it was that triggered Prof. Volokh in this case (and dozens like it)?

What is it with this guy and trans issues?

I don’t expect you — or any of this blog’s fans or operators — to have enough courage or character to respond.