Oh, sweet fucking Christ on a goddamned cross. Would someone care to explain to me how this person's due process rights have been stripped?
1. There was a bomb threat made. That's evidence of a crime.
2. The bomb threat was made from an IP address connected to the lad's computer. That's probable cause to believe he committed the crime.
3. Police obtained a search warrant pursuant to that probable cause.
4. Police executed that search warrant and arrested the lad.
5. He is currently held without bail, which is not that unusual for serious crimes.*
Would someone care to explain how any of this is a violation of due process? If he has an alibi (dubious, since the only indication he has an alibi is the unsworn self-serving statements of his mother), he is entitled to present that... at fucking trial
Honestly, anyone who gives the slightest fucking credence to any of these allegations of wrongdoing is wholly ignorant of even the most basic aspects of American law. Consider this morsel from the Lew Rockwell article:
As of today (May 5), a criminal complaint in this case does exist, but Ashton has yet to be charged with a crime.
Oh, merciful Mother of God. A criminal complaint is the document by which one is charged with a crime. The above sentence is like saying, "He has a birth certificate, but his birth hasn't been certified."
Raw fucking insanity and FUD is all I see here. And I am astonished that none of you see it, too. This is easily the equivalent of saying the Internet is a series of tubes.
*Actually, the article doesn't even say whether he was held without bail. It's entirely possible he was offered bail but simply didn't post it. Oh, the humanity! Fascism!