Hey, there! Log in / Register

Bail set at $100,000 for those Moorish sovereign citizens, except for one teen, who was released to his parents

One of the sovereign citizens under arrest

One of the sovereign citizens under arrest in Wakefield. Photo by Live Boston.

State Police and the Middlesex Count District Attorney's office report that ten adults and a teenarger were charged with a variety of gun charges for the standoff that shut Rte. 128 in Wakefield and sent nearby residential areas into lockdown for several hours yesterday.

The 11 members of Rise of the Moors, from Rhode Island, the Bronx, Baldwin, NY and Detroit, were each charged with eight counts of unlawful possession of a firearm and unlawful possession of ammunition, use of body armor in commission of a crime, possession of a high-capacity magazine, improper storage of firearms in a vehicle and conspiracy to commit a crime, authorities say.

Authorities say the heavily armed men, in two vehicles told troopers they were traveling from Rhode Island to Maine for "training." According to State Police and the DA's office:

None of the men, who were dressed in military fatigues and body armor and were armed with long guns and pistols, has a license to carry firearms. Troopers have recovered eight firearms thus far: three AR-15 rifles; two pistols; a bolt-action rifle; a shotgun; and a short barrel rifle.

Two of the adults refused to identify themselves, authorities say.

Topics: 

Ad:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

Thank you for keeping us informed Adam. Happy 4th of July.

up
Voting closed 2

Or gold, silver, or "federal reserve notes"?

up
Voting closed 0

Of eight

up
Voting closed 26

"Wearing body armor in commission of a crime"? Come on, it's not like they were stopped shooting up a bank. You got them on gun violations, fair...but just because they had body armor at the same time that's additional charges? Come on.

up
Voting closed 6

If you don't like it, call your state rep.

up
Voting closed 5

It's the law, look it up.

up
Voting closed 1

A) a society where the actual law is applied in all cases, or
B) a society where the law maybe applies and maybe doesn’t, depending upon the mood the prosecutor is in that day, or whether the accused is likable or not, or what the hot button issues are in the election for DA, etc.?

An excess of “prosecutorial discretion” leads to the bad habit of leaving unreasonable laws on the books rather than modifying or repealing them, which leads to B above.

up
Voting closed 0

I want a society in which prosecutors thoughtfully weigh context and intentions, consult with experts, read up on caselaw, etc.

up
Voting closed 0

Clearly they've met the letter of the law.

On the intent side, we seem to be in disagreement here as to whether or not this meets the intent of the law. I'd have to imagine this law hasn't been on the books for all that long, some of the lawmakers who passed it may even still be in office, so it is actually feasible to determine the true intent rather than trying to dig through historical legal documents.

If the line isn't drawn at deliberate, unlawful, and open possession of a firearm, then where is the line? If they desired this to only be applied to bank robberies, they could have certainly worded the law differently.

The language of this specific law is fairly straightforward to read: https://malegislature.gov/laws/generallaws/partiv/titlei/chapter269/sect...

up
Voting closed 0

I mean, these guys basically openly say they are treasonous. But For the most part these guys are peaceful with the police (except for a few instances like West Memphis). I’ve always wondered deep down how many of them actually believe this stuff, or are they just criminally minded? Or do they see it as a way to make money without breaking the law (YouTube clicks).

Another issue here is that possession crimes like this are not intent crimes. Which brings us back to the open treason stuff…..

Wtf knows.

up
Voting closed 3

One would think that at some point, these heavily armed individuals who believe they are legally and morally right to do what they are doing, would attempt to (in their minds) justifiably defend themselves against an oppressive state and it's officers of the law that are (in their minds, again) illegally infringing on their sovereign rights.

If the guns aren't to defend themselves from that, then what are they even for?

up
Voting closed 3

I think they know how to stay out of the governments eye for the most part, although I have no clue what they were thinking doing what they did on Friday. I’m sure they believe they have the right to drive, travel, and carry guns for all the same reasons. They simply don’t believe in laws.

up
Voting closed 0

"You got them on gun violations"

You misspelled gun crimes. Numerous ones. Illegal high capacity magazines, not securing weapons in their vehicles properly, open carrying without permits.

They also created a public disturbance forcing the shutdown of an interstate and terrorizing the local neighborhood. They lacked drivers licenses and registrations. Refused to follow instructions and resisted / evaded arrest. No charges on any of those fronts, so I'd say they got things on the easy side, at least so far.

And yes, when you get arrested for not doing what the police tell you to while armed to the teeth, the fact that you were also wearing body armor which would only be for the express purpose of preventing law enforcement from using lethal force to stop you, you betcha that's an extra charge.

These idiots were clearly on their way to start something. You don't just randomly decide to caravan with a slew of your buddies on a couple hour drive armed to the teeth with no plates or licenses and wearing body armor unless you are looking to start some shit, or you're severely delusional.

up
Voting closed 0

Just to tell me you don't know what you're talking about.

up
Voting closed 0

I wonder why so high? Are they deemed to be a flight risk? Sure they've got some guns, but I haven't read any reporting that these particular guys are dangerous.

up
Voting closed 0

They're all from out-of-state with limited or no connections to Massachusetts, so they're probably less likely to return for a trial. Also, their whole deal is that they don't believe the U.S. government and its various subdivisions (like MA) have any authority over them -- so do you think they will return to face criminal charges laid by a government that in their minds has no power over them? I do not.

up
Voting closed 0

These geniuses actually think that because flags in courtrooms have gold on the edges that the courts aren't legit.

up
Voting closed 0

The Black ones don't much buy that Admiralty Court stuff, preferring instead to focus on 18th-century Moroccan-American treaties and made-up UN declarations and such.

up
Voting closed 5

A Globe interview with the mother of the supposed ringleader reveals a lot of interesting things: this guy was an ex-Marine, grew up in Rhode Island, tried to establish a farm, studied law for some undisclosed amount of time, and then somehow stumbled upon Rise of the Moors and decided he was now a sovereign citizen of Morocco, not obligated to follow US laws but quick to cite US laws on video in a haphazard way. Mom (of course) says he’s a good kid, just wants to help people, and I kind of believe that. The problem is he comes off like a kid who got their hands on just enough of some knowledge to be completely wrong in applying said knowledge and decided “This means I must brazenly steal a case of beer.”

up
Voting closed 0

The one which ends with free beer

up
Voting closed 13

A teenarger!

up
Voting closed 0