Police: No Evidence of Terrorism in Rochester Car Crash

Improve the News Foundation -

Facts

  • Rochester, N.Y. Police Chief David Smith said Tuesday there is no evidence yet of terrorism related to the fatal car crash outside the Kodak Center after midnight on Jan. 1. While he said it was 'not abnormal' for their 'Joint Terrorism Task Force [to be] involved' in the investigation, they have 'uncovered no evidence of an ideology and no nexus to terrorism, either international or domestic.'1
  • Meanwhile, the FBI has reportedly opened its investigation into a potential act of domestic terrorism. The incident occurred at around 2 a.m. Monday morning local time outside the Kodak Center where 1K people were gathered to see a local band play. As police were conducting a traffic patrol, a Ford SUV crashed into another SUV, killing two and injuring several pedestrians in the crosswalk.2
  • The suspect, Michael Avery, 35, is believed to have traveled to Rochester in his personal vehicle, after which he rented a Ford Expedition at the Rochester airport. According to Smith, Avery then made 'at least half a dozen purchases of gasoline and gas containers at different locations' between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Dec. 30.3
  • After firefighters put out the fire from the crash for nearly an hour, Smith said they found 'at least a dozen gasoline canisters in and around the striking vehicle,' after which the 'Rochester police department bomb squad and the joint arson task force responded to the scene.'4
  • After conducting a search warrant of a hotel room Avery rented, police said they thought he may have been an 'emotionally disturbed' man. After analyzing Avery's journal and interviewing his family members, they added that he may have had undiagnosed bipolar disorder. They also discovered a suicide note and journal in the hotel room.5
  • Avery was not immediately killed at the scene but later died from his injuries. A total of five pedestrians were injured, one of whom was dealing with life-threatening injuries, according to Smith.6

Sources: 1The Hill, 2Forbes, 3NBC, 4CNN, 5New York Post and 6FOX News.

Narratives

  • Narrative A, as provided by Congressman Seth Moulton. Mass killings today are often part of a broader online network — either officially or unofficially — of enablers who push potential perpetrators to commit acts of violence in public. Under the current law, whereby domestic killers are charged only under regular criminal codes, police are unable to go after those who are egging on and supporting domestic terrorists. If these dangerous actions are designated as terrorism, not only will police have more resources to investigate killings but work to prevent them in the first place.
  • Narrative B, as provided by POLITICO Magazine. Violent acts should be punished, but broadening the definition of terrorism would go beyond acts and criminalize beliefs. US law enforcement has already discriminated against Muslims by quickly deeming them terrorists while their non-Muslim counterparts are 'lone wolves.' However, broadening the definition to allow the government to oppress more ideologies linked to past violent attacks — from animal rights activists to White supremacists — would only create a more dystopian and intrusive police state.

Predictions