Report Of Incident Property Damage Injury Form: Fill & Download for Free

Either a prosecutor or a defense attorney may ask the court to consider a person a hostile witness if they are not testifying favorably. It essentially means that the witness you call to testify is not on your side, i.e., is 'hostile' to your client's position. Nevertheless, you want to call that witness to testify in your case (in which you're trying to prove your case, not disprove the other side's) for other reasons, i.e., to fill in some facts that need to be stated for you to satisfy your burden of putting into evidence all of the facts necessary to demonstrate your entitlement to bring the claims your client has asserted. If the Judge accepts your assertion that the witness is hostile to your case, you are permitted to 'lead' the witness with questions like, 'isn't it true that the light was red when you first observed the blue car?' If the witness is not 'hostile' the lawyer is not permitted to 'lead' the witness, i.e., to suggest the answer to the question. All you're allowed to do is to ask open-ended questions like 'where were you on the 20th of March? Who, if anyone else, was also there?' Treating a witness as hostile is a mechanism to cross examine the witness when there are circumstances that dictate this. Here are 2 such circumstances:When you have called a witness in your own case in chief but they are an unfavorable witness or an 'adverse witness,' you may treat the witness as hostile and cross examine the witness. You technically do not have to request permission from the Judge but it is always good form and respectful if you do request such permission.When you have called a witness and are performing direct examination of this witness (because you believed they would testify as a favorable witness) but they start changing their story and are not cooperating, you may request permission to treat the witness as an adverse witness (aka 'hostile'). This allows the attorney to cross examine the witness.-Corri D. Fetman, Esq.Corri Fetman & Associates, Ltd.www.cfalawfirm.comUnder the rules of evidence, you are not supposed to ask leading questions of your own witness because leading questions suggest the answer. In other words, you can spoon feed answers to your witnesses, and that's not what the courts want. They want you to ask open ended questions so the witness can testify based on what they know instead of what the attorney tells them.For example, if you call a witness to testify that the light was red when the other side crashed into your client, the attorney cannot ask:"Isn't it true that the light was red?"Instead, they should ask 'What color was the light?' This way the witness answers based on their own experience.For the first question, the other side's attorney would object to the question as "leading."However, if the witness is 'hostile' for whatever reason then you may ask the court to declare the witness as hostile so you can ask leading questions, even if the attorney called the witness. Without such a showing, it is presumed that your own witnesses are not 'hostile', so opposing attorneys will object to your questions as leading.Usually, a 'hostile' witness is one that won't answer your questions, shows a bias against you, or other similar reasons. I once had a hostile witness in a criminal case where I was a prosecutor, and the witness was a cooperating criminal. He wouldn't answer my questions directly so I asked the judge to declare him a hostile witness.Here is Federal Rule of Evidence 611:http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_611-MATTHEW S. JAMESJames DefenseThe essence of the question is asking the court to recognize that the lawyer has called a witness to the stand on direct examination that is hostile to the claim or defense. Normally, a lawyer is given very little latitude when questioning witnesses favorable to her positions in the case. The lawyer is not supposed to ask a question that suggests the desired answer. Lawyers call these 'leading questions.' Think of them this way, a leading question essentially allows the lawyer to testify through the witness by designing questions that can only be answered in a yes/no format. Questions that begin with 'Isn't it true that...' or that in themselves are statements not asking for open explanation are leading questions. If I as a trial lawyer called the witness to the stand there is a normal presumption that the witness is favorable to me, therefore I cannot ask leading questions.When the lawyer asks the court to treat the witness as hostile, the lawyer is asking permission to lead the witness to make specific points from a witness that normally does not want those points made. Normally, unless the witness is actually an opponent in the litigation or a hired expert witness for an opponent, the court will not allow the witness to be treated as a hostile witness until the witness exhibits hostility to the sponsoring lawyers positions in testimony with non-leading, open ended questioning.-Lin McCrawMcCrawGanttBoard Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal SpecializationIf I am representing my client and call a witness, I generally expect that witness to support my case. Sometimes a witness will have information that is NOT supportive. Since I've called the witness, I may ask the court to name the witness as 'hostile.' That allows me to use the tools of cross-examination which are not generally allowed in direct testimony.-J. Kim Wright, J.D.Member, NC Bar1989 Graduate of University of Florida Lawhttp://www.cuttingedgelaw.com/The phrase appears in movies and television more so than in real life. However what it really means is that the lawyer is seeking the ability to ask 'leading' questions of the witness. A 'leading' question is one that suggests the answer desired by the lawyer. Examples include 'You never actually saw Bill that night, did you?' or 'You never reported the incident to management, did you?' Leading questions allow the lawyer to control the dialogue more easily so that the jury hears the testimony in such a way that is the lawyer's choosing while making it harder for the witness to avoid answering the question.Generally a lawyer cannot ask leading questions of witnesses unless the witness is on cross-examination or is being clearly evasive in the witness' answers (i.e. 'hostile'). So the lawyer is asking the judge to make the determination that the witness is being clearly evasive so as to allow the lawyer to ask leading questions. Certain witnesses are assumed to be 'hostile' and therefore it isn't necessary to ask for permission to ask leading questions. These can include opposing parties, people employed by opposing parties or otherwise under the influence or control of opposing parties.-John H. Barkley, Esq.Attorney at LawShustak & Partners, P.C.Certain questioning techniques are allowed when a witness is consideredhostile, which would otherwise be objectionable. The best example - alawyer can ask the witness questions that are leading in nature, which wouldotherwise not be allowed. A judge will grant such permission if the witness is not answering questions properly, being evasive or otherwise difficult.-Lance E. MuellerMueller, S.C.Generally speaking the phrase 'permission to treat a witness as hostile' is a cue to both the judge and the jury that a witness is not cooperating with the judicial process and/or is not being honest with their answers. An attorney can ask questions to a hostile witness that they would not be able to ask a friendly witness, so the allowance can broaden the manner of interrogation.-Matthew Reischer, Esqhttp://www.LegalAdvice.comNormally when a lawyer calls a witness they are only allowed to conduct direct examination. So for example, a question might be 'What time did you leave the store?' After a lawyer finishes questioning a witness the other side gets to cross examine the witnesses. In cross examination you can ask leading questions. A leading question might be 'Isn't it true that you left the store at 4:30?' The advantage to a leading question is that the lawyer is providing the information to the court through the witness.When a lawyer calls a witness who is non-cooperative or refuses to answer questions, they can, at the discretion of the judge, be considered hostile. When a witness is determined to be hostile the lawyer on 'direct' can then use leading questions to facilitate their testimony.This technique is used if you require the testimony of the adverse party,or someone close to them (parent, spouse, employee, etc.) in order to make a critical point in a case. A lawyer has to be careful though, because judges don't always grant the request. Then you are stuck trying to 'pull' what you need from direct questions, and then the other lawyer gets to lead what might be a very friendly witness to them.I have tried civil, criminal and family court cases involving direct and cross examination of witnesses, and dealt with the 'permission to treat the witness as hostile' question in a multi-day trial just a few weeks ago.-James R. Snell, Jr.Attorney at LawLexington, South Carolinawww.snelllaw.comThis is when a lawyer asks a Judge permission to ask a witness, usually his own, leading questions (You saw my client sign the contract, correct?) on direct examination. Leading questions usually are only asked during cross examination. A hostile witness is someone who's testimony is contrary to the facts and law the lawyer seeks to present, therefore the lawyer must now impeach the testimony of the witness. A witness on cross examination is presumed to be hostile, so the lawyer does not need to seek the court's permission to treat the witness as hostile.-Andrellos MitchellAttorney & Counselor at LawLaw Office of Andrellos MitchellThe short answer is that it means the lawyer is asking the judge if the lawyer may insert a ring through the witness's nose and lead the witness wherever the lawyer leads.Now, why might that lawyer need that permission and why might the judge grant it? Well, broadly speaking, there are two rules that lawyers must follow at trial concerning the manner in which lawyers question witnesses. On direct examination, a lawyer generally may not 'lead the witness.' On cross-examination, the lawyer may do so, and generally will use nothing but leading questions.Direct examination is the type of examination that, generally speaking, occurs when a lawyer is putting on his client's case-in-chief and calls a witness to the stand to testify. The lawyer must not lead the witness during questioning on direct examination. A leading question is one that suggests the answer, such as, 'You left the bar at about 10:00 p.m. on that night, correct?' 'Yes.' But if the lawyer has the witness on direct examination, the lawyer may not lead. Instead, the lawyer has to resort to who, what, why, when, and how questions, or 'Please explain to the jury . . .' or 'Please tell the Court . . .' So, back to our example about the guy leaving the bar, on direct examination the question becomes, 'Now, on the night of the accident, Mr. Client, about what time did you leave the bar?'On cross examination, which occurs when the lawyer is questioning a witness called or clearly associated with an adverse party, the lawyer is permitted to lead the witness. Cross examination is great fun for trial lawyers, because in essence, they get to do the testifying. In theory, the lawyer just puts the words in the witness's mouth, and ideally all the witness says is yes or no. And as a result, the lawyer has much greater control over the course of the testimony. Well-coached witnesses will fight you, but there are other techniques for dealing with that problem. By contrast, direct examination involves much less control by the lawyer and can be more challenging for that reason.So what's with this permission-to-treat-witness-as-hostile question? Well, on occasion a lawyer may have to call a witness in his client's case-in-chief who is just not all that fond of the lawyer's client. Now, if that witnesses is someone clearly identified with an adverse party in the case-let's say plaintiff calls to the stand in her case-in-chief an employee of the corporate defendant-then the lawyer may get to call the witness 'under cross-examination.' In that instance, the lawyer can start with leading questions right out of the gate, from the first question. But let's suppose the witness I have to call is a former employee of my client and for reasons totally unrelated to this case, that ex-employee is just not a real fan of my client anymore. The judge probably will not permit me to call the witness in my client's case-in-chief 'on cross examination' right out of the box. Instead, I may have to begin the questioning as if on direct examination with my usual non-leading, who, what, where, when, and why questions. If, however, the witness starts going off on my client, clearly demonstrating hostility and damaging my oh-so-well-crafted story for the jury, then I turn to the judge and say, 'Your Honor, may I have permission to treat the witness as hostile?' And if the judge grants that permission, I may now start using leading questions to get the witness to where I want to go.-Charles PenotThe Law Offices of Charles Penot, PLLCWhen a lawyer asks permission to treat a witness as hostile, they are doing that so that they can 'lead' the witness. When an attorney calls a witness and questions him or her, that is called a direct examination and the attorney must ask open-ended questions rather than leading questions. This is a more amiable conversation than a cross-examination, during which leading questions are asked (wherein the answer is implied). Unfortunately, sometimes a witness that may be helpful to your case does not want to cooperate and therefore, your client will be better protected if you can ask leading questions (it's also easier to elicit the answer you want). The attorney must request permission to treat the witness as hostile so that the leading questions are not objectionable.-Shari-Lynn Cuomo Shore, Esq.Wolf & Shore, LLCwww.wolfandshorelaw.comWhen a lawyer asks to treat a witness as hostile they are asking the Judge for permission to question the witness in a certain way. Traditionally when a lawyer calls a witness in their case in chief (i.e. the plaintiff's lawyer calls the defendant as a witness on the plaintiff's behalf), the witness may not be favorable to the parties case (i.e. the defendant doesn't want to testify on the plaintiff's behalf). When you are calling your own witness that is determined to be hostile you may do certain things such as ask leading questions 'Weren't you there on that night' instead of 'Where were you on this night'. It basically involves starting the question off assuming the answer or using questions that solicit yes and no answers. The goal of leading questions is to solicit information the witness is otherwise going to be elusive in providing when asking open ended or less direct questions.Attorney's usually have an unfettered right to ask leading questions on cross-examination, so if the plaintiff's lawyer calls the defendant as a witness, when the defendant's attorney is cross examining her at that time, the defendant's attorney may automatically (subject to each state's rules) use leading questions.-Tiffany S. FrancAttorneyhttp://www.pklaw.com/Generally, a witness must ask open-ended questions when examining their own witnesses and can only cross-examine (i.e., ask leading questions) when questioning witnesses called by an opposing party. However, sometimes a lawyer needs to call as a witness someone who is not cooperative and acting hostile to the lawyer and his client. If that happens, the lawyer can ask the judge for 'permission to treat the witness as hostile.' If the judge agrees, the lawyer can then ask leading questions. A judge will review both the witness's manner on the stand and any interest adverse to the lawyer and his client. So, most frequently, a lawyer tries to question his witnesses with open-ended questions and seeks permission to treat as hostile after the witness demonstrates hostility and un-cooperativeness. Nevertheless, sometimes a lawyer can ask before even questioning if it is clear that the witness will be adverse. If not granted, he can request again if the witness is, in fact, hostile to the initial questions.-Thomas J. Simeone, Esq.Simeone & Miller, LLPwww.SimeoneMiller.comThe meaning or purpose of asking the court for leave to treat a witness as hostile is that the attorney is seeking leave to ask leading questions (which are generally not allowed on direct examination of a witness that the attorney has called to testify) and to possibly impeach or discredit the witness with his/her prior statements or conduct.It is generally used when a witness who is either thought to be neutral, or even un-helpful to the attorney's client in some respect, has to be called because they can offer some key piece of evidence that cannot be introduced otherwise.-John R. O'Brien, AttorneyChicago, IllinoisLicensed in Illinois since 1978An adverse or hostile witness is a witness whose trial testimony, on DIRECT examination, is "adverse" or "hostile" to the lawyer questioning the witness. For example, a lawyer calls the complainant at trial when the lawyer represents the defendant who supposedly victimized the complainant. The lawyer can ask that the complainant be designated "hostile" because the complainant is adverse to the defense position. Allowing the witness to be designated hostile allows the lawyer to then ask LEADING questions. A leading question calls for a "yes" or "no" answer. The direct examination then proceeds in a leading manner (as if the witness is being cross-examined).-Neal Davis is a criminal defense attorney in Houston, Texas and founder of the Neal Davis Law Firm, PLLC. Neal is board certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization in criminal law and has garnered national recognition for defending cases before the US Supreme Court and Texas courts.www.houstoncriminaldefenselawyers.comYou are asking the judge to allow you to ask the witness leading questions, which have presumptive elements about them and may even suggest the answer.Some witnesses are adverse by nature - party opponents for instance. They are hostile witnesses by nature and will usually erect vague and ambiguous answers to your questions. They can drag the case on with such antics. Who, what, when, where and why are not leading. "Isn't it true?" is a leading question and allowed during cross examination or if the court allows leading questions on direct examination of a hostile witness.-Dr. Shawn Council, Esquire, LPDAttorney at LawDoctorate of Law & Policywww.shawncouncil.comAn angry witness is stewing on the witness stand poised to pounce at any moment on our hero - the social pariah of a lawyer who is taking on corrupt government, big business, or vile criminals. As our hero fires off several rounds of questions, he's outmatched by the cunning of the witness. Until suddenly, our hero screams out, 'Permission to treat the witness as hostile?' The judge readily grants the motion and a high stakes drama unfolds which eventually leads to the witness's shocking confession before a stunned jury.But permission to treat a witness as hostile isn't usually all that exciting. The rules of evidence allow attorneys to use leading questions in cross examination against the opposing counsel's witness. A leading question is a question that implies the answer and usually involves a yes or no question. For example, these types of questions might start with 'Isn't it true you...."Usually, these types of questions are improper with one's own witnesses. The jury needs to hear testimony from the witness, not the lawyer. So, a lawyer should ask his own witness open ended questions such as who, what, where, when, why, and how. The idea behind the rules is that the opposing counsel's witnesses may be biased or untruthful and leading questions are a tool to fully examine the accuracy of a witness's statement, whereas one's own witnesses must be free to explain what he or she witnessed and not influenced by an attorney trying to win a case. And yet there are times when the attorney's own witness is evasive or prone to be hostile by virtue of the circumstances of the case. In those times, a court may grant latitude to use leading questions because the attorney's own witness is not much different from that of opposing counsel. This is a very common tool when witnesses recant prior testimony.While this fun declaration is usually not as exciting as it's portrayed in the media, it's a very useful tool to the skilled lawyer to get to the bottom of the matter.-Mark Heath, criminal defense attorney,http://www.jacksonwhitelaw.com/Please see the following articles for more information about jobs related to criminal law:Matt Murphy, Senior Deputy District Attorney, Orange County, CaliforniaHow to Become a District AttorneyConsidering a Career as a District Attorney?The Life and Career of Attorney Nancy Grace, Who Turned Lawyer after the Murder of Her Fiance.Top 39 Tips for New Litigation Associates and Trial Lawyers: How to Be a Good Litigation AttorneyJob Opportunities in Criminal LawJury Consultants Continue to be in Hot DemandThe Life and Career of Marcia Clark Criminal Defense AttorneyA Television show for military related crimes by former pilot turned Lawyer : Lt. Cmdr. "Harm" Rabb. Jr.Please see the following articles for more information about jobs related to criminal law:Make a career change as Public DefenderThe Rocky Balboa of Criminal Defense Law: Joseph TacopinaThe Life and Career of Tony Serra: Criminal Defense LawyerDefending the Mob: Chicago Criminal Defense Attorney Rick HalprinTop 39 Tips for New Litigation Associates and Trial Lawyers: How to Be a Good Litigation AttorneyJob Opportunities in Criminal LawJury Consultants Continue to be in Hot DemandA Television Show for Military Related Crimes by Former Pilot Turned Lawyer: Lt. Cmdr. "Harm" Rabb. Jr.Share+1TweetLinkedinArticle CategoryLegal JobsLegal ArticlesLegal Career AdviceAttorney Career AdviceAttorney Q & AFeatured TestimonialsBeing the comprehensive and well managed site that it is, I do not think that LawCrossing needs any suggestions.StephenFactsLawCrossing Fact #233: We provide inspirational quotes and testimonials to further motivate you throughout the job-search process.Benefits of LCRelated JobsJob titleAssociate AttorneyLocationMiami, FLDescriptionWe are a very busy commercial litigation boutique. We are seeking an associate attorney with at l...Share+1TweetLinkedinApply nowNOW TRENDING ON BCG ATTORNEY SEARCHThe Most Important Characteristic Attorneys Need to Succeed and Why It Is Almost Impossible for Them to Keep ItTop 20 Reasons Why There Is No Better Profession Than Practicing LawLaw School Grades and Your CareerMOST POPULAR ARTICLESThe Right and Wrong Reasons for Switching Jobs as an AttorneyPart 2: Erin Brockovich Losing Ed MasryWhen Being a Lawyer Is Not for You: How to Successfully Transition into the Job of Your Dreams!2013 LawCrossing Salary Survey of Lawyer Salaries in Best Law Firms2015 LawCrossing Salary Survey of Lawyer Salaries in Best Law Firms60 Nontraditional Jobs You Can Do with a Law Degree (and Should Strongly Consider Doing)Try Us For FreeEmail:Try Us For FreeOnly LawCrossing consolidates every job it can find in the legal industry and puts all of the job listings it locates in one place.We have more than 25 times as many legal jobs as any other job board.We list jobs you will not find elsewhere that are hidden in small regional publications and employer websites.We collect jobs from more than 250,000 websites and post them on our site.Increase your chances of being seen! Employers on public job boards get flooded with applications. Our private job boards ensure that only members can apply to our job postings.Testimonial of the WeekI was able to obtain my new job through LawCrossing. I love your service! Hopefully, I won't need your help for a while, but if I do, I'll certainly sign up again. I have already told others about your great site.Theresa D. ColoradoShare Your Testimonial+ Read More TestimonialWhy Everyone Prefers LawCrossing to Other Job SitesClick hereLegal Job Market UpdatesStay Ahead. Get your weekly career digest giving you:the latest legal jobslegal employment news and trendscareer advice and moreGet it nowFeatured JobsTax - International Attorney in Detroit, MIDetroit, MIApply NowLitigation Attorney / Litigation - Appellate Attorney in Berkeley, CABerkeley, CAApply NowContract Law Attorney in Chicago, ILChicago, ILApply NowTop Actively Interviewing JobsLegal Resume / Cover Letter WriterDallas, TXApply NowIP Attorney with 2-4 years of Electrical Engineering experienceDallas, TXApply NowTrademarks Attorney with 3-5 years of IP experienceChicago, ILApply NowJob of the DayLitigation AttorneySeattle, WAAnglin Flewelling Rasmussen Campbell & Trytten LLP (AFRCT) seeks a litigation attorney in Seattle, WA area with a minim...Employer: AFRCT, LLPApply for freeGet the rankingUseful LinksUS News Law School Rankings 2016Associate Resources on BCG Attorney SearchLegal Job Market: Facts and FiguresAdd LawCrossing to My FavoritesQuestions?What is LawCrossing?Who Else Is Ready to Never Have to Worry About Recessions and the Legal Job Market Again?Why Job Boards Are Evil!Blow Away Your Competition with LawCrossingGet More Employers to Respond to Your Applications and Hire YouWhy You Are Not Aware of 95% of the Jobs Out ThereWhy LawCrossing's Marketing Problem is Good for YouWhy It is Important to See Every Job Site There isPrivate versus Public Job BoardsWhy You Need to Manage Your Job Search in One PlaceWho Else Wants Their Phone Ringing Off the Hook With Quality Job Interviews?Do Not Use Another Job Board Until You Read ThisReal-Time Job UpdatesSign up free and receive new jobs by email as soon as they become available.First NameEmailAreas of PracticeSelectAntitrust and Trade RegulationBankruptcyConstructionCorporateEmploymentEnergyEnvironmentalERISA/Employee BenefitsGovernmentHealth CareImmigrationInsuranceIntellectual Property - LitigationIntellectual Property - OtherIntellectual Property - PatentIntellectual Property - Trademark/CopyrightInternet/E-CommerceIP/Technology TransactionsLitigationOtherPatent Agents/Technical SpecialistsReal EstateSecurities LitigationTaxTelecommunicationsTrust and EstatesWhite Collar CrimeRegions of InterestSelectAlabamaAlaskaArizona - OtherArizona - PhoenixArkansasCalifornia - Los AngelesCalifornia - Oakland/East BayCalifornia - Orange CountyCalifornia - OtherCalifornia - SacramentoCalifornia - San DiegoCalifornia - San FranciscoCalifornia - Silicon Valley/San JoseColorado - DenverColorado - OtherConnecticut - HartfordConnecticut - OtherDelaware - OtherDelaware - WilmingtonDistrict of ColumbiaFlorida - MiamiFlorida - OrlandoFlorida - OtherFlorida - TampaGeorgia - AtlantaGeorgia - OtherHawaiiIdahoIllinois - ChicagoIllinois - OtherIndiana - IndianapolisIndiana - OtherIowaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMaryland - BaltimoreMaryland - OtherMassachusetts - BostonMassachusetts - OtherMichigan - DetroitMichigan - Grand RapidsMichigan - OtherMinnesota - Minneapolis/St. PaulMinnesota - OtherMississippiMissouri - Kansas CityMissouri - OtherMissouri - St. LouisMontanaNebraska - OmahaNebraska - OtherNevadaNew HampshireNew JerseyNew MexicoNew York - AlbanyNew York - BuffaloNew York - New York CityNew York - OtherNew York - RochesterNorth Carolina - CharlotteNorth Carolina - OtherNorth Carolina - RaleighNorth DakotaOhio - CincinnatiOhio - ClevelandOhio - OtherOklahomaOregonPennsylvania - OtherPennsylvania - PhiladelphiaPennsylvania - PittsburghRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennessee - NashvilleTennessee - OtherTexas - AustinTexas - DallasTexas - HoustonTexas - OtherTexas - San AntonioUtahVermontVirginia - NorthernVirginia - OtherVirginia - RichmondWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsinWyoming- Asia - China - Beijing- Asia - China - Other- Asia - China - Shanghai- Asia - Hong Kong- Asia - Japan - Other- Asia - Japan - Tokyo- Asia - Other- Asia - Singapore- Asia - Thailand- Asia - UAE - Abu Dhabi- Asia - UAE - Dubai- Australia - Melbourne- Australia - Other- Canada- Europe - Belgium - Brussels- Europe - Belgium - Other- Europe - England - London- Europe - England - Other- Europe - France - Other- Europe - France - Paris- Europe - Germany - Dussel- Europe - Greece - Athens- Europe - Germany - Munich- Europe - Germany - Other- Europe - Greece - Other- Europe - Holland - Amsterdam- Europe - Holland - Other- Europe - Italy - Other- Europe - Italy - Rome- Europe - Other- Europe - Russia - Moscow- Europe - Russia - Other- Europe - Spain - Madrid- Europe - Spain - Other- Mexico- South AmericaSubmitJob Search TipDon't forget your greatest resource for insider information-current or past colleagues, vendors, service providers. Ask everyone you know for information. You may be surprised by who knows what.What Members are SayingMeganI found the site to be very useful. For attorney jobs, I have not found any other site with nearly as many listings.GraceThe site was extremely useful. I found an attorney position in New York City so I am very satisfied. I will probably end up telling my friends about it.+ More success stories+ Share your success story with usTop Law Firm SalariesWhat Do In-House Attorney Positions Pay?A Comprehensive Guide to Bar Reciprocity: What States Have Reciprocity for Lawyers and Allow You to Waive into the BarWhat Is the Average Salary for Your Job?Exclusive Report: 2017 State of the American Legal Job MarketTestimonial of the weekOut of all the other job boards I have used, LawCrossing was definitely the most impressive. I have received many job interviews from jobs I applied to on your site.Mark Herskovitz Los Angeles, CA+Read More TestimonialShare Your TestimonialAll we do is research jobsOur team of researchers, programmers, and analysts find you jobs from over 50,000 career pages and other sourcesOur members get more interviews and jobs than people who use "public job boards"© 2017 LawCrossing Privacy statement | Site mapShoot for the moon. Even if you miss it, you will land among the stars.

(Information from wikipedia)"Pizzagate" is a debunked conspiracy theorythat went viral during the 2016 United States presidential election cycle. It has been extensively discredited by a wide range of organizations, including the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia. In March 2016, the personal email account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign manager, was hacked in a spear-phishingattack. WikiLeaks published his emails in November 2016. Proponents of the Pizzagate conspiracy theory falsely claimed the emails contained coded messages that connected several U.S. restaurants and high-ranking officials of the Democratic Party with an alleged human trafficking and child sex ring. One of the establishments allegedly involved was the Comet Ping Pong restaurant and pizzeria in Washington, D.C. Members of the alt-right, and other opponents of Clinton's presidential campaign, spread the conspiracy theory on social media outlets such as 4chan, 8chan, and Twitter. In response, a man from North Carolina traveled to Comet Ping Pong to investigate the conspiracy and fired a rifle inside the restaurant. The restaurant owner and staff also received death threats from conspiracy theorists.On October 30, 2016, a Twitteraccount that posted white supremacist material and presented itself as run by a New York lawyer claimed that the New York City Police Department (NYPD) had discovered a pedophilia ring linked to members of the Democratic Party while searching through Anthony Weiner's emails. Throughout October and November 2016, WikiLeaks had published John Podesta's emails. Proponents of the theory read the emails and alleged they contained code words for pedophilia and human trafficking. Proponents also claimed Comet Ping Pong was a meeting ground for Satanic ritual abuse.The story was later posted on fake news websites, beginning with Your News Wire, which cited a 4chan post from earlier that year. The Your News Wire article was subsequently spread by pro-Trump websites, including Home Page - Subject: Politics, which added the claim that the NYPD had raided Hillary Clinton's property. The Conservative Daily Post ran a headline claiming the Federal Bureau of Investigation had confirmed the theory.Spread on social mediaAccording to the BBC, the allegations spread to "the mainstream internet" several days before the 2016 U.S. presidential election, after a Reddit user posted a Pizzagate "evidence" document. The original Reddit post, removed some time between November 4 and 21, alleged the involvement of the Washington, D.C., business Comet Ping Pong:Everyone associated with the business is making semi-overt, semi-tongue-in-cheek, and semi-sarcastic inferences towards sex with minors. The artists that work for and with the business also generate nothing but cultish imagery of disembodiment, blood, beheadings, sex, and of course pizza.The story was picked up by other fake-news websites like InfoWars, Planet Free Will, and The Vigilant Citizen,and was promoted by alt-right activists such as Mike Cernovich, Brittany Pettibone, and Jack Posobiec. Other promoters included: David Seaman, former writer for TheStreet.com, CBS46anchor Ben Swann, basketball player Andrew Bogut, and Minecraft creator Markus Persson. On December 30, as Bogut recovered from a knee injury, members of /r/The Donald community on Reddit promoted a false theory that his injury was connected to his support for Pizzagate. Jonathan Albright, an assistant professor of media analytics at Elon University, said that a disproportionate number of tweets about Pizzagate came from the Czech Republic, Cyprus, and Vietnam, and that some of the most frequent retweeters were bots. Members of the Reddit community /r/The_Donald created the /r/pizzagatesubreddit to further develop the conspiracy theory. The sub was banned on November 23, 2016, for violating Reddit's anti-doxingpolicy after users posted personal details of people connected to the alleged conspiracy. Reddit released a statement afterwards, saying, "We don't want witchhunts on our site". After the ban on Reddit, the discussion was moved to the v/pizzagate sub on Voat, a website similar to Reddit.Some of Pizzagate's proponents, including David Seaman and Michael G. Flynn (Michael Flynn's son), have evolved the conspiracy into a broader government conspiracy called "Pedogate". According to this theory, a "satanic cabal of elites" of the New World Order operates international child sex trafficking rings.Turkish press reportsIn Turkey, the allegations were reported by pro-government newspapers (i.e., those supportive of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan), such as Sabah, A Haber, Yeni Şafak, Akşam and Star. The story appeared on Turkey's Ekşi Sözlük website and on the viral news network HaberSelf, where anyone can post content. These forums reposted images and allegations directly from the since-deleted subreddit, which were reprinted in full in the state-controlled press. Efe Sozeri, a columnist for The Daily Dot, suggested Turkish government sources were pushing this story to distract attraction from a child abuse scandal there in March 2016.As Pizzagate spread, Comet Ping Pong received hundreds of threats from the theory's believers. The restaurant's owner, James Alefantis, told The New York Times: "From this insane, fabricated conspiracy theory, we've come under constant assault. I've done nothing for days but try to clean this up and protect my staff and friends from being terrorized." Some adherents identified the Instagramaccount of Alefantis and pointed to some of the photos posted there as evidence of the conspiracy. Many of the images shown were friends and family who had liked Comet Ping Pong's page on Facebook. In some cases, imagery was taken from unrelated websites and purported to be Alefantis' own. The restaurant's owners and staff were harassed and threatened on social media websites, and the owner received death threats. The restaurant's Yelp page was locked by the site's operators citing reviews that were "motivated more by the news coverage itself than the reviewer's personal consumer experience". Several bands who had performed at the pizzeria also faced harassment. For example, Amanda Kleinman of Heavy Breathing deleted her Twitter account after receiving negative comments connecting her and her band to the conspiracy theory. Another band, Sex Stains, had closed the comments of their YouTube videos and addressed the controversy in the description of their videos. The artist Arrington de Dionyso, whose murals are frequently displayed at the pizzeria, described the campaign of harassment against him in detail, and said of the attacks in general, "I think it's a very deliberate assault, which will eventually be a coordinated assault on all forms of free expression." The affair has drawn comparisons with the Gamergate controversy.Pizzagate-related harassment of businesses extended beyond Comet Ping Pong to include other nearby D.C. businesses such as Besta Pizza, three doors down from Comet; Little Red Fox; the popular bookstore Politics and Prose; and the French bistro Terasol. These businesses received a high volume of threatening and menacing telephone calls, including death threats, and also experienced online harassment. The co-owners of Little Red Fox and Terasol filed police reports. Brooklyn restaurant Roberta's was also pulled into the hoax, receiving harassing phone calls, including a call from an unidentified person telling an employee that she was "going to bleed and be tortured". The restaurant became involved after a since-removed YouTube video used images from their social media accounts to imply they were part of the hoax sex ring. Others then spread the accusations on social media, claiming the "Clinton family loves Roberta's". East Side Pies, in Austin, Texas, saw one of its delivery trucks vandalized with an epithet, and was the target of online harassment related to their supposed involvement in Pizzagate, alleged connections to the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Illuminati. The Federal Bureau of Investigation investigated Pizzagate-related threats in March 2017 as part of a probe into possible Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections.Criminal Charges:On December 4, 2016, Edgar Maddison Welch, a 28-year-old man from Salisbury, North Carolina, arrived at Comet Ping Pong and fired three shots from an AR-15-style rifle that struck the restaurant's walls, a desk, and a door. Welch later told police that he had planned to "self-investigate" the conspiracy theory. Welch saw himself as the potential hero of the story—a rescuer of children. He surrendered after officers surrounded the restaurant and was arrested without incident. No one was injured.Welch told police he had read online the Comet restaurant was harboring child sex slaves and that he wanted to see for himself if they were there. In an interview with The New York Times, Welch later said that he regretted how he had handled the situation but did not dismiss the conspiracy theory, and rejected the description of it as "fake news". Some conspiracy theorists speculated the shooting was a staged attempt to discredit their investigations.On December 13, 2016, Welch was charged with one count of "interstate transportation of a firearm with intent to commit an offense" (a federal crime). According to court documents, Welch attempted to recruit friends three days before the attack by urging them to watch a YouTube video about the conspiracy. He was subsequently charged with two additional offenses, with the grand jury returning an indictment charging him with assault with a dangerous weapon and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime.On March 24, 2017, following a plea agreement with prosecutors, Welch pleaded guilty to the federal charge of interstate transport of firearms and the local District of Columbia charge of assault with a dangerous weapon. Welch also agreed to pay $5,744.33 for damages to the restaurant. U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson sentenced Welch to four years in prison on June 22, 2017; at the sentencing hearing, Welch apologized for his conduct and said he had been "foolish and reckless".On January 12, 2017, Yusif Lee Jones, a 52-year-old man from Shreveport, Louisiana, pleaded guilty in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana to making a threatening phone call to Besta Pizza, another pizzeria on the same block as Comet Ping Pong, three days after Welch's attack. He said he threatened Besta to "save the kids", and "finish what the other guy didn't".On January 25, 2019, Comet Ping Pong suffered an arson attack when a suspect started a fire in one of its backrooms. Employees quickly snuffed the blaze and nobody was injured.Debunking:The conspiracy theory has been widely discredited and debunked. It has been judged to be false after detailed investigation by the fact-checking website Snopes.com and The New York Times. Numerous news organizations have debunked it as a conspiracy theory, including: the New York Observer, The Washington Post, The Independent in London, The Huffington Post, The Washington Times, the Los Angeles Times, Fox News, CNN, and the Miami Herald. The Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia characterized the matter as "fictitious".Much of the purported evidence cited by the conspiracy theory's proponents had been taken from entirely different sources and made to appear as if it supported the conspiracy. Images of children of family and friends of the pizzeria's staff were taken from social media sites such as Instagram and claimed to be photos of victims. The Charlotte Observer noted the diverse group of sources that had debunked the conspiracy theory and pointed out that this included the Fox News Channel in addition to The New York Times.On December 10, 2016, The New York Timespublished an article that analyzed the theory's claims. They emphasized that:Theorists linked the conspiracy to Comet Ping Pong through similarities between company logos and symbols related to Satanism and pedophilia. However, The Times noted similarities were also found in the logos of a number of unrelated companies, such as AOL, Time Warner, and MSN.[2]Theorists claimed an underground network beneath Comet Ping Pong; the restaurant has no basement, however, and the picture used to support this claim was taken in another facility.[2]Theorists claimed to have a picture of restaurant owner Alefantis wearing a T-shirt endorsing pedophilia. However, the image was of another person, and the shirt, which read "J' ❤ L'Enfant," was actually a reference to the L'Enfant Cafe-Bar in DC, whose owner was pictured in the image, and which itself is named after Pierre Charles L'Enfant, the designer of much of the layout of Washington, D.C.[2]Theorists claimed John and Tony Podesta kidnapped Madeleine McCann using police sketches that were, in fact, two sketches of the same suspect taken from the descriptions of two eyewitnesses.[2]No alleged victims have come forward and no physical evidence has been found.In an interview with NPR on November 27, 2016, Comet Ping Pong owner James Alefantis referred to the conspiracy theory as "an insanely complicated, made-up, fictional lie-based story" and a "coordinated political attack". Syndicated columnist Daniel Ruth wrote that the conspiracy theorists' assertions were "dangerous and damaging false allegations" and that they were "repeatedly debunked, disproved and dismissed".Despite the conspiracy theory being debunked, it continued to spread on social media, with over one million messages using hashtag #Pizzagate on Twitter in November 2016. Stefanie MacWilliams, who wrote an article promoting the conspiracy on Planet Free Will, was subsequently reported by the Toronto Star as saying, "I really have no regrets and it's honestly really grown our audience." Pizzagate, she said, is "two worlds clashing. People don't trust the mainstream media anymore, but it's true that people shouldn't take the alternative media as truth, either."On December 8, Hillary Clinton responded to the conspiracy theory, speaking about the dangers of fake news websites. She said, "The epidemic of malicious fake news and fake propaganda that flooded social media over the past year, it's now clear that so-called fake news can have real-world consequences."Public opinionA poll conducted by Public Policy Polling on December 6–7, 2016, asked 1,224 U.S. registered voters if they thought Hillary Clinton was "connected to a child sex ring being run out of a pizzeria in Washington DC". Nine percent of respondents said they believed she was connected, 72% said they did not, and 19% were not sure.A poll of voters conducted on December 17–20 by The Economist/YouGov asked voters if they believed that "Leaked e-mails from the Clinton campaign talked about pedophilia and human trafficking - 'Pizzagate'." The results showed that 17% of Clinton voters responded "true" while 82% responded "not true"; and 46% of Trump voters responded "true" while 53% responded "not true".Alex Jones and InfoWarsAfter the Comet Ping Pong shooting, Alex Jones backed off from the idea that the D.C. pizzeria was the center of the conspiracy.On December 4, InfoWars uploaded a YouTube video that linked Pizzagate to the November 13 death of a sex-worker-rights activist. The video falsely claimed that she had been investigating a link between the Clinton Foundation and human trafficking in Haiti. It speculated she had been murdered in connection with her investigation. According to the activist's former employer, family and friends, her death was in fact a suicide and she was not investigating the Clinton Foundation. By December 14, Infowars had removed two of its three Pizzagate-related videos.In February 2017, Alefantis' lawyers sent Jones a letter demanding an apology and retraction. Under Texas law, Jones was given a month to comply or be subject to a libel suit. In March 2017, Alex Jones apologized to Alefantis for promulgating the conspiracy theory, saying: "To my knowledge today, neither Mr. Alefantis, nor his restaurant Comet Ping Pong, were involved in any human trafficking as was part of the theories about Pizzagate that were being written about in many media outlets and which we commented upon."Michael T. Flynn and Michael Flynn Jr.In November 2016, Michael T. Flynn, then on President-Elect Donald Trump's transition team and Trump's designate for National Security Advisor, posted multiple tweets on Twitter containing conspiratorial material regarding Hillary Clinton. They alleged that Clinton's campaign manager, John Podesta, drank the blood and bodily fluids of other humans in Satanic rituals, which Politico says "soon morphed into the '#pizzagate' conspiracy theory involving Comet Ping Pong". On November 2, 2016, Flynn tweeted a link to a story with unfounded accusations and wrote, "U decide - NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails: Money Laundering, Sex Crimes w Children, etc ... MUST READ!" The tweet was shared by over 9,000 people, but was deleted from Flynn's account sometime during December 12–13, 2016.After the shooting incident at Comet Ping Pong, Michael Flynn Jr., Michael T. Flynn's son and also a member of Trump's transition team, tweeted; "Until #Pizzagate proven to be false, it'll remain a story. The left seems to forget #PodestaEmails and the many 'coincidences' tied to it."On December 6, 2016, Flynn Jr. was forced out of Trump's transition team. Spokesman Jason Miller did not identify the reason for his dismissal, however, The New York Timesreported that other officials had confirmed it was related to the tweet.(End of wikipedia)All that from one lie to hurt Hillary and HELP tRUMP!!! This story alone may have been enough to taint the election in tRumps favor, but there were others as well.This is how misinformation is used to swing a presidential election.DOWN WITH THE TYRANT tRUMP!!!

There are several examples that come to mind Anti-abortion violence:MurdersIn the United States, violence directed towards abortion providers has killed at least eight people, including four doctors, two clinic employees, a security guard, and a clinic escort;[I 1][I 2] Seven murders occurred in the 1990s.[I 3]March 10, 1993: Dr. David Gunn of Pensacola, Florida was fatally shot during a protest. He had been the subject of wanted-style posters distributed by Operation Rescue in the summer of 1992. Michael F. Griffin was found guilty of Gunn's murder and was sentenced to life in prison.[I 4]July 29, 1994: Dr. John Britton and James Barrett, a clinic escort, were both shot to death outside another facility, the Ladies Center, in Pensacola. Rev. Paul Jennings Hill was charged with the killings. Hill received a death sentence and was executed on September 3, 2003. The clinic in Pensacola had been bombed before in 1984 and was also bombed subsequently in 2012.December 30, 1994: Two receptionists, Shannon Lowney and Lee Ann Nichols, were killed in two clinic attacks in Brookline, Massachusetts. John Salvi was arrested and confessed to the killings. He died in prison and guards found his body under his bed with a plastic garbage bag tied around his head. Salvi had also confessed to a non-lethal attack in Norfolk, Virginia days before the Brookline killings.January 29, 1998: Robert Sanderson, an off-duty police officer who worked as a security guard at an abortion clinic in Birmingham, Alabama, was killed when his workplace was bombed. Eric Robert Rudolph, who was also responsible for the 1996 Centennial Olympic Park bombing, was charged with the crime and received two life sentences as a result.October 23, 1998: Dr. Barnett Slepian was shot to death with a high-powered rifle at his home in Amherst, New York.[11] His was the last in a series of similar shootings against providers in Canada and northern New York state which were all likely committed by James Kopp. Kopp was convicted of Slepian's murder after being apprehended in France in 2001.May 31, 2009: Dr. George Tiller was shot and killed by Scott Roeder as Tiller served as an usher at a church in Wichita, Kansas.[I 5]Attempted murder, assault, and kidnappingAccording to statistics gathered by the National Abortion Federation (NAF), an organization of abortion providers, since 1977 in the United States and Canada, there have been 17 attempted murders, 383 death threats, 153 incidents of assault or battery, 13 wounded,[12] 100 butyric acid attacks, 373 physical invasions, 41 bombings, 655 anthrax threats,[13] and 3 kidnappings committed against abortion providers.[I 6] Between 1997 and 1990 77 death threats were made with 250 made between 1991 to 1999 .[12] Attempted murders in the U.S. included:[I 1][I 7][I 8] IN 1985 45% of clinics reported bomb threats, decreasing to 15% in 2000. One fifth of clinics in 2000 experienced some form of extreme activity. [14]August 1982: Three men identifying as the Army of God kidnapped Hector Zevallos (a doctor and clinic owner) and his wife, Rosalee Jean, holding them for eight days.[I 9]August 19, 1993: Dr. George Tiller was shot outside of an abortion facility in Wichita, Kansas. Shelley Shannon was charged with the crime and received an 11-year prison sentence (20 years were later added for arson and acid attacks on clinics).July 29, 1994: June Barret was shot in the same attack which claimed the lives of James Barrett, her husband, and Dr. John Britton.December 30, 1994: Five individuals were wounded in the shootings which killed Shannon Lowney and Lee Ann Nichols.December 18, 1996: Dr. Calvin Jackson of New Orleans, Louisiana was stabbed 15 times, losing 4 pints of blood. Donald Cooper was charged with second degree attempted murder and was sentenced to 20 years. "Donald Cooper's Day of Violence", by Kara Lowentheil, Choice! Magazine, December 21, 2004.October 28, 1997: Dr. David Gandell of Rochester, New York was injured by flying glass when a shot was fired through the window of his home.[I 10]January 29, 1998: Emily Lyons, a nurse, was severely injured, and lost an eye, in the bombing which also killed off-duty police officer Robert Sanderson.Arson, bombing, and property crimeAccording to NAF, since 1977 in the United States and Canada, property crimes committed against abortion providers have included 41 bombings, 173 arsons, 91 attempted bombings or arsons, 619 bomb threats, 1630 incidents of trespassing, 1264 incidents of vandalism, and 100 attacks with butyric acid ("stink bombs").[I 6] The New York Times also cites over one hundred clinic bombings and incidents of arson, over three hundred invasions, and over four hundred incidents of vandalism between 1978 and 1993.[I 11] The first clinic arson occurred in Oregon in March 1976 and the first bombing occurred in February 1978 in Ohio.[I 12] Incidents have included:May 26, 1983: Joseph Grace set the Hillcrest clinic in Norfolk, Virginia ablaze. He was arrested while sleeping in his van a few blocks from the clinic when an alert patrol officer noticed the smell of kerosene.[I 13]May 12, 1984: Two men entered a Birmingham, Alabama clinic shortly after a lone woman opened the doors at 7:45 am. Forcing their way into the clinic, one of the men threatened the woman if she tried to prevent the attack while the other, wielding a sledgehammer, did between $7,500 and $8,000 of damage to suction equipment. The man who damaged the equipment was later identified as Father Edward Markley. Father Markley is a Benedictine Monk who was the Birmingham diocesan "Coordinator for Pro-Life Activities". Markley was convicted of first-degree criminal mischief and second-degree burglary. His accomplice has never been identified. Following the Birmingham incident, Markley entered the Women's Community Health Center in Huntsville Alabama, assaulting at least three clinic workers. One of the workers, Kathryn Wood received back injuries and a broken neck vertebrae. Markley was convicted of first-degree criminal mischief and three counts of third-degree assault and harassment in the Huntsville attack.[I 14]December 25, 1984: An abortion clinic and two physicians' offices in Pensacola, Florida, were bombed in the early morning of Christmas Day by a quartet of young people (Matt Goldsby, Jimmy Simmons, Kathy Simmons, Kaye Wiggins) who later called the bombings "a gift to Jesus on his birthday."[I 15][I 16][I 17] The clinic, the Ladies Center, would later be the site of the murder of Dr. John Britton and James Barrett in 1994 and a firebombing in 2012.March 29, 1993: Blue Mountain Clinic in Missoula, Montana; at around 1 a.m., an arsonist snuck onto the premises and firebombed the clinic. The perpetrator, a Washington man, was ultimately caught, convicted and imprisoned. The facility was a near-total loss, but all of the patients' records, though damaged, survived the fire in metal file cabinets.[I 18][I 19][I 20]May 21, 1998: Three people were injured when acid was poured at the entrances of five abortion clinics in Miami, Florida.[I 21]October 1999: Martin Uphoff set fire to a Planned Parenthood clinic in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, causing US$100 worth of damage. He was later sentenced to 60 months in prison.[I 22]May 28, 2000: An arson at a clinic in Concord, New Hampshire, resulted in several thousand dollars' worth of damage. The case remains unsolved.[I 23][I 24][I 25] This was the second arson at the clinic.[I 26]September 30, 2000: John Earl, a Catholic priest, drove his car into the Northern Illinois Health Clinic after learning that the FDA had approved the drug RU-486. He pulled out an ax before being forced to the ground by the owner of the building, who fired two warning shots from a shotgun.[I 27]June 11, 2001: An unsolved bombing at a clinic in Tacoma, Washington, destroyed a wall, resulting in $6,000 in damages.[I 22][I 28]July 4, 2005: A clinic Palm Beach, Florida, was the target of an arson. The case remains open.[I 22]December 12, 2005: Patricia Hughes and Jeremy Dunahoe threw a Molotov cocktail at a clinic in Shreveport, Louisiana. The device missed the building and no damage was caused. In August 2006, Hughes was sentenced to six years in prison, and Dunahoe to one year. Hughes claimed the bomb was a "memorial lamp" for an abortion she had had there.[I 29]September 11, 2006 David McMenemy of Rochester Hills, Michigan, crashed his car into the Edgerton Women's Care Center in Davenport, Iowa. He then doused the lobby in gasoline and started a fire. McMenemy committed these acts in the belief that the center was performing abortions; however, Edgerton is not an abortion clinic.[I 30] Time magazine listed the incident in a "Top 10 Inept Terrorist Plots" list.[I 31]April 25, 2007: A package left at a women's health clinic in Austin, Texas, contained an explosive device capable of inflicting serious injury or death. A bomb squad detonated the device after evacuating the building. Paul Ross Evans (who had a criminal record for armed robbery and theft) was found guilty of the crime.[I 32]May 9, 2007: An unidentified person deliberately set fire to a Planned Parenthood clinic in Virginia Beach, Virginia.[I 33]December 6, 2007: Chad Altman and Sergio Baca were arrested for the arson of Dr. Curtis Boyd's clinic in Albuquerque. Baca's girlfriend had scheduled an appointment for an abortion at the clinic.[I 34][I 35]January 22, 2009 Matthew L. Derosia, 32, who was reported to have had a history of mental illness[I 36] rammed an SUV into the front entrance of a Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Paul, Minnesota.[I 37]January 1, 2012 Bobby Joe Rogers, 41, firebombed the American Family Planning Clinic in Pensacola, Florida, with a Molotov cocktail; the fire gutted the building. Rogers told investigators that he was motivated to commit the crime by his opposition to abortion, and that what more directly prompted the act was seeing a patient enter the clinic during one of the frequent anti-abortion protests there. The clinic had previously been bombed at Christmas in 1984 and was the site of the murder of Dr. John Britton and James Barrett in 1994.[I 38]April 1, 2012 A bomb exploded on the windowsill of a Planned Parenthood clinic in Grand Chute, Wisconsin, resulting in a fire that damaged one of the clinic's examination rooms. No injuries were reported.April 11, 2013 A Planned Parenthood clinic in Bloomington, Indiana, was vandalized with an axe.[I 39]September 4, 2015 A Planned Parenthood clinic in Pullman, Washington was intentionally set on fire. No injuries were reported due to the time of day, but the FBI was involved because of a history of domestic terrorism against the clinic.[I 40]October 22, 2015 A Planned Parenthood clinic in Claremont, New Hampshire was vandalized by a juvenile intruder. Damaged in the attack were computers, furniture, plumbing fixtures, office equipment, medical equipment, phone lines, windows, and walls. The flooding that resulted from the vandalism also damaged an adjacent business.[I 41] [I 42]Anthrax threatsThe first hoax letters claiming to contain anthrax were mailed to U.S. clinics in October 1998, a few days after the Slepian shooting; since then, there have been 655 such bioterror threats made against abortion providers. None of the "anthrax" in these cases was real.[I 7][I 43]November 2001: After the genuine 2001 anthrax attacks, Clayton Waagner mailed hoax letters containing a white powder to 554 clinics. On December 3, 2003, Waagner was convicted of 51 charges relating to the anthrax scare.Additionally, there was the Oklahoma City bombing - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com - generally considered one of the worst acts of domestic violence in US history.However, the assassinations of four US Presidents (Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy) could also be considered terrorist acts: http://americanhistory.about.com/od/uspresidents/a/assassinations.htm. In the same vein, the assassinations of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, and Robert Kennedy were also terrorists attacks.The attack on the Boston Marathon http://www.history.com/topics/boston-marathon-bombings - would be the most recent example of terrorism on US soil.