-
Oklahofila Courtr—Distiibt Attorney
Eric Ruffin spoke into a microphone and expressed his innocence.
The Facebook Live video, captioned “Interview Talking About Me Facing 30 Years And My Life,” was Ruffin’s public response to being charged as a terrorist under the Oklahoma law.
“I’m a terrorist? Y’all had a whole building get blown up down here and you want to talk and say I’m a terrorist?” asked Ruffin, an Oklahoma City entertainer, in a video that has since been deleted. “There’s a memorial downtown ofthe work that a terrorist did.”
An affidavit filed by police alleges that during a Black Lives Matter protest on May 30, Ruffin encouraged the destruction of a business and the burning of an Oklahoma County sheriff vehicle while broadcasting both incidents on Facebook. Police say Ruffin is heard off camera calling for the group to burn the building, saying C.J. Bail Bonds was “fixing to go.”
Ruffin, who faces a preliminary hearing on Dec.14, is one of three people charged under the Oklahoma Anti-Terrorism Act for their alleged roles in destruction that took place during the protest. Others were charged with lesser crimes like rioting for throwing rocks that caused damage to the Oklahoma City National Memorial & Museum. One person was charged with assault and battery upon a police officer.
The terrorism charges could mean up to life in prison. A rioting charge however would carry the lesser time of two to 20 years.
Rev. Sheri Dickerson, director of Black Lives Matter Oklahoma City, said the charges under the anti-terrorism act are an intimidation tactic and state-sanctioned violence against those practicing their inalienable rights of free speech, protest and assembly.
“It’s an abuse and an overreach of power. It’s not something that we’re not accustomed to seeing, especially within the Oklahoma County judicial system,” Dickerson said.
Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater has stood by the charges, saying the accused “subverted peaceful protests and impaired the open discussion regarding race in our country.”
“When you act like a terrorist, you will be treated like a terrorist,” District Attorney David Prater told The Oklahoman in June.
The Push For More Punitive Measures
Earlier this month, Prater reduced charges against five people who had been accused of inciting a riot in June. They were arrested after a confrontation with police while painting a street mural with the words “Black Lives Matter” outside of the Oklahoma City Police Department. The individuals pled guilty to the lesser misdemeanor charge of obstructing an officer.
Tamara Piety, University of Tulsa law professor and First Amendment scholar, said that in the current cases it seems terrorism laws are being used to ratchet up the penalties for things that in different circumstances would have serious penalties anyway.
Over the past few months, lawmakers and prosecutors across the country have considered more punitive actions for crimes committed at protests. Nationally, Attorney General William Barr told federal prosecutors last month that they should consider charging rioters with sedition.
At the state level, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis introduced a bill that would charge protesters with felonies for damaging property or inflicting injuries, sentence them to mandatory jail time for hitting officers and bar them from receiving state benefits or working for the state. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott laid out legislative proposals to increase penalties and create new laws that would require jail time for offenses committed at protests.
In Oklahoma, State Sen. Rob Standridge, R-Norman, is preparing to propose legislation that creates harsher penalties for those who destroy property during protests. Standridge is in the midst of a reelection campaign where law and order is a major issue.
The Oklahoma Anti-Terrorism Act was created in 2002, seven years after the bombing ofthe Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. The bombing is regarded as the nation’s single worst act of domestic terrorism, killing 168 people and injuring approximately 850. The tragedy moved national legislatures to focus on the creation of domestic terrorism laws.
The law defines terrorism as “one or more kidnappings or other act of violence, or a series of acts of violence, resulting in damage to property, personal injury or death, or the threat of such act or acts that appear to be intended: a. to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, b. to influence the policy or conduct of a government by intimidation or coercion, or c. in retaliation for the policy or conduct of a government by intimidation or coercion”.
The law also states that “peaceful picketing or boycotts and other nonviolent action shall not be considered terrorism.”