[jstarfish]

It's a trespassing charge (on "public" property), not embezzlement or insider trading or any sort of crime that directly benefitted him.

I'm as cynical as it gets but even I can see how easy it is to get swept up in mob mentality.

You too can see it play out in venues as innocuous as Sunday church. Nobody ever knows which hymns to stand up for, but everybody else goes along with it when the first person stands.

[rchaud]

>You too can see it play out in venues as innocuous as Sunday church. Nobody ever knows which hymns to stand up for, but everybody else goes along with it when the first person stands.

I see people using such damage-reduction parallels on Twitter and Reddit, but it's strange to see it on HN.

Is this the best comparison you came up with? Trespassing on private property with an armed mob :: standing up for the wrong hymn at a church?

[Out_of_Characte]

I dont think it is meant as an absolvement of his actions but rather a sensible explanation how certain people cooperated with the crowd without obvious benefit.

[rchaud]

That still doesn't hold water. A closer parallel would be breaking into the church with a group of armed people with the intention of disrupting the proceedings.

Standing up for the wrong hymn doesn't necessitate a lawyer-approved 'statement' to the press.

[awillen]

Yeah I mean the key difference is if you get caught up in the actions of a mob of armed insurrectionists, that means you were in a crowd of armed insurrectionists in the first place.