A bit of background may be called for here.
Sherman Austin admits to being an anarchist - a twenty year old one at that. Because
of that it's perhaps understandable that when he was charged and learned that
he could sit in jail for many years, he preferred to plead guilty and accept a
one-year sentence. Still, guilty of what is an open question. He doesn't seem
to have advocated the use of violence in overthrowing the state.
An interview with
Austin from August of 2003 (that interestingly, appeared not in a political
journal, but on a technological site), though not definitive, helped me stop my
search for more examples. In that interview Austin was asked:
Do you know of anyone else who's faced similar charges?
to which he replied:
I don't know anyone else who was charged under this law. My lawyer said he's
never handled any case like this--that this is the craziest case he's ever dealt with.
Only one response to that article showed up in the discussion forums of the web
site, and it was posted almost a year after the interview. The poster noted that:
Actually, Sherman's website did not contain bombmaking / molotov cocktail information.
He had a link on his page to a site that did. This site was not maintained / controlled /
or affiliated with Sherman, other then the fact that he had a link to it (he had many links
on his page to gBs of information, there's no way he could screen it all).
I won't pass judgment, but there does seem to be a pattern here.
Go to: Is about a handful enough?, or
Go to: But not necessarily internet related, or
Go to: It's not exactly Rashamon, but ...,
or
Go to: Guilt by hyperlink?