The justice’s wife allegedly spat at her neighbors’ car and traded insults, prompting the young couple to call the police

After reports that an upside-down American flag had flown outside the Virginia residence of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito during the period surrounding Jan. 6, 2021, the conservative justice blamed the flag’s placement on his wife, Martha-Ann — claiming her actions were a result of a clash over a neighbor’s anti-Trump yard sign and a verbal insult.

Now, the Alitos’ neighbors — Emily Baden and her then-boyfriend, now husband — are disputing the Alitos’ version of events, according to the The New York Times, which reviewed text messages and a police call to corroborate the claims. According to the Badens, Martha-Ann instigated the weekslong conflict and, at one point, spat at their car as they drove by the Alito’s home.

Per the Times, the couple had placed signs on their yard that read “Trump Is a Fascist” and “You Are Complicit” shortly after the Jan. 6 insurrection. Emily told the publication that the second sign was not directed at the justice and his wife, but at Republicans in general. The signs were soon taken down by Emily’s mother out of safety concerns.

  • sepi@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    5 months ago

    When you conform and shut up, they win. This fear for your family is what they want you to feel and how they’ve silenced entire nations in the past.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yes but when they SWAT you and one of your family members dies you lose even harder.

      • Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        5 months ago

        The lack of accountability of the police in the US is astounding. People talk about swatting like and avalanche or something. Yeah, it’s just going to kill you, nothing you can do about it.

        • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          5 months ago

          Even if we had accountability, accountability happens after the fact. It’s a small consolation that a swat team got charged after they killed your wife or kids. Your loved ones are still dead.

          Not that we don’t need it, don’t get me wrong, but we need procedural overhauls even more, to stop people from getting killed in the first place.

          • Tja@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            18
            ·
            5 months ago

            After 10 swat teams end up in jail, they are going to be careful entering people’s homes.

            • TWeaK@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              5 months ago

              They also need to address the false calls. I think the phone bill payer should automatically be liable for the deployment costs of a false call, unless they point the finger at the person who actually made the call. That wouldn’t quite be justice, as it wouldn’t necessarily make them liable for the false report, but it would go a long way to stopping them.

              • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                5 months ago

                I’d even go a step further and charge them with something criminal. Reckless endangerment if nothing else. The cost of the call itself is only a small part of it; the intent is to cause fear or harm to the individual being targeted, and they should be liable for that.

                • TWeaK@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Absolutely, but proving all of that is a tall order. Turning it into a civil offense where the bill payer is automatically liable sets a much lower bar, where successful prosecution is far more likely.

              • Fondots@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                5 months ago

                I work in 911 dispatch, the area I work in has gotten a few attempted swatting calls, and they usually tend to come from various free calling apps, or burner phones, and I think even a handful of times from payphones (yes, there’s still a few out there) which can make it really damn hard to tie them back to an actual person the way we can with most regular phone numbers. They also tend to call our 10-digit non-emergency numbers instead of 911, so we don’t get an address or location info for the caller like we would on a 911 line.

                For what it’s worth, the cops in my area have done a really good job of not going nuts when they respond to these calls, and not to toot my own horn too hard, but I think a lot of that has to do with the quality of the dispatchers at my center, every time we’ve gotten one, whoever took the call pretty much immediately caught on that something was fucky and notated the hell out of every strange thing about the call to make sure the cops knew something may be up. One of the first swatting calls I remember seeing back when they started taking off a few years ago was answered by a somewhat older dude who had never even heard of swatting at that point, and he still caught on pretty quick that something was fishy. There’s other dispatch centers I’ve dealt with where I absolutely would not trust them to catch on or handle it well.

                • barsquid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  It’s even more egregious that SWAT is sent out on some anonymous VoIP shit originating from a VPN. That is not probable cause. In a just society everyone breaking and entering on zero evidence would be civilly and criminally liable.

                  • Fondots@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    The problem is that we do get a lot of actual legitimate calls through these VoIP apps, or from people calling from out of the area, on our 10 digit lines, etc.

                    I don’t know the actual demographics, but it seems like a lot of people use these apps as their primary phones, especially in lower income communities, homeless people, etc. and of course those people have have actual emergencies too, and we wouldn’t want withhold or delay appropriate resources from them in an emergency just because we don’t like their phone number.

                    We also get people from across the country or occasionally even other countries calling our 10 digit lines because they spoke with their friend or relative either on the phone or over discord or facebook or whatever, they disclosed that they’re having an emergency but are unable or unwilling to call for themselves, so their friend looks up our number and calls for them.

                    And a lot of these swatting type calls aren’t too far-fetched, we do get murders and shootings, barricaded subjects, etc. with some regularity (not an every day occurrence by any means, but if you work here for a year or two you’ll probably at least see a couple happen if not answer the call yourself.)

                    When it might be called for, we do send swat, they can take a while to mobilize thanks to how it’s organized in our county with the SWAT teams being made up of officers from multiple different departments, so it’s better to have them stage nearby and not need them than to wait until shit hits the fan and potentially take 20-30 minutes or even longer for them to make it there.

                    But again, they’re staging, they might go as far surrounding the house, evacuating neighbors, drones in the air, etc. but unless there’s a clear immediate threat they exhaust all possible options before breaking in, and so far that’s paid off. YMMV, I absolutely do not trust all departments to show that much restraint.

      • CatOnTheChainWax@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 months ago

        The Some More News podcast is doing a week of reporting on police training, misconduct/murder, and specifically “How they’re trained to kill you in your homes”- episode title. I’ll be following it and start to look at the topic myself since it’s an area I know nothing about but massively affects everyone. Other than experiencing the disgusting nature of dealing with cops and navigating the legal system with and against them, I don’t know how they function as a national system or how departments work. There is so much pro police or detective propaganda on TV and everywhere that the lines have become blurred on the reality of their actual jobs and role in society.

        • quindraco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          5 months ago

          their actual jobs

          They don’t appear to have actual jobs. I’m sure they have job descriptions on paper, but SCOTUS has been quite clear that they can’t be legally compelled to do their jobs, and sure enough, every time I’ve ever called the police, they’ve simply refused to enforce the law. The last time was when a police sergeant literally told me that boat theft wasn’t a criminal matter.

          • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            What? I’m curious what the rationale was. Theft is classified as a crime, so how can any tangible item followed by theft not be a crime?!

              • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                5 months ago

                Damn. That’s just nuts. Thanks for sharing this experience as I’ve never heard of this. I don’t own a boat, but they can apply that to anything unless I am rich.

              • CatOnTheChainWax@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                I’m sorry you had to go through that, one of my experiences with them is getting hit by a car while cycling breaking some important bones, they showed up and gave me a business card to call them while I was laying on the ground bleeding from everywhere offering no help other than asking if I could walk to the hospital several blocks away. The EMTs chased them away thankfully. Then 8 months later they finally finished typing their whole one paragraph “police report” for my insurance claim, getting every detail wrong. A random shooter guy shot at me and missed this past November while I was out in my neighborhood walking my dog, in a different City, I found his name and all details about him to give the police. They still haven’t arrested him because he didn’t actually hit me while shooting at my head and can’t be bothered to “do their jobs”

                • quindraco@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  My boat was very cheap, so a lawsuit would lose me money, but you might be able to win a lot more over attempted murder. Maybe worth the cost of paying a lawyer to hear you out?

    • rayyy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      5 months ago

      This fear for your family is what they want you to feel

      The reason to fear low-life creatures is because they will attack irrationally with little cause. There will come a time when good people must stand their ground, and it is not far - be prepared.

      • Adalast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I am sitting here contemplating the wording for a sign that says something along the lines of “This house’s guns are for dealing with fascists.” Should still fall under free speach and not fighting words or threats since it is devoid of specific intent and specific targeting words.

        They seem to think they are the only ones who have means for aggression, they are direly mistaken.