HLSS523Wk5

Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with

free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-

19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the

company's public news and information website.

Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related

research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this

research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other

publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights

for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means

with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are

granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre

remains active.

Aggression and Violent Behavior 60 (2021) 101509

Available online 24 September 2020 1359-1789/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Sovereign citizens: A narrative review with implications of violence towards law enforcement

Christine M. Sarteschi Chatham University, United States of America

A R T I C L E I N F O

Keywords: Sovereign citizens Threat Law enforcement Domestic terrorism Violence

A B S T R A C T

Extremist movements are growing in the United States. One concerning extremist group is that of sovereign citizens. Sovereign citizens have been labeled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a terrorist threat. Relative to other research about extremist groups, limited research exists about the sovereign citizen movement. The purpose of this article is to review all relevant literature concerning this movement, as it pertains to the threat posed to law enforcement, via descriptive research and to identify existing knowledge gaps. Most empirical work, about sovereign citizens, thus far has focused on legal matters, mental health, radicalization, and postdiction of targeted violence. The work presented here serves as a foundation for future research concerning this group.

1. Introduction

In 2013, a survey of law enforcement intelligence officers rated sovereign citizens as being the top serious terrorist threat, even higher than Islamic terrorists (Carter et al., 2014). Sovereign citizens are a loosely affiliated group of individuals whose primary belief is the ille- gitimacy of the United States (U.S.) government. They are antigovern- ment extremists who claim to be above the law and whose origins can be traced back to the Posse Comitatus, tax protestors and militias (Loeser, 2015). Their ideology often overlaps with other far-right extremist groups. They are mostly known for committing acts of paper terrorism, the practice of filing frivolous, pseudolegal claims. These claims involve large sums of money, and are often aimed at government officials, whom they believe have wronged them (Loeser, 2015).

Most concerning are the sovereign citizens who have committed violent acts. Two incidents, one in Bunkerville, Nevada, and another at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, show their proclivity for violence. They pose a unique and significant threat to law enforcement during traffic stops (Smith, 2019) because of their reluctance to follow basic traffic and motor vehicle laws. Upon being stopped for a traffic infrac- tion, sovereigns can become argumentative, combative and non- cooperative. They will often engage in conflict-oriented tactics such as demanding that officers prove jurisdiction, refusing to answer questions or insisting that they “do not consent” to the actions of law enforcement. Another common tactic is when asked to roll down their vehicle’s windows, they will only crack the window, claiming that the window is broken. This makes communication difficult or impossible. Law

enforcement often has no choice but to break the window and physically remove them from their vehicles. These are long, protracted interactions that can and have become deadly. Lethal force may erupt resulting in the death of the sovereign citizen or the police officer. Specific examples, of the latter, include the 2010 killing of two West Memphis, Arkansas law enforcement officers (LEOs) by father and son sovereign citizens. Another sovereign citizen shot and killed a California Highway Patrol (CHP) officer after being pulled over for an obstructed license plate (KPIX, 2013).

Despite the problems and threats posed, the sovereign citizen liter- ature base remains quite limited. The primary goal of this research is to provide a narrative review of the literature, to summarize what is known to date and to review the violence aimed at law enforcement by sover- eign citizens. This work will not focus on sovereign citizen beliefs and ideology, as that has been extensively described elsewhere (cf. Berger, 2016; Parker, 2014; Sarteschi, 2020). Finally, implications of the current state of affairs and suggestions for future areas of research are included.

1.1. Prevalence and definitions

Accurate prevalence rates, of sovereign citizens, are difficult to ascertain largely due to a lack of government data. “Watchdog” orga- nizations and education centers have seemingly been filling in the gaps, most notably the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the Program on Extremism at George Washington University, and the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) headquartered at the University of

E-mail address: [email protected].

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Aggression and Violent Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/aggviobeh

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2020.101509 Received 26 August 2020; Accepted 20 September 2020

Aggression and Violent Behavior 60 (2021) 101509

2

Maryland. These groups have been tracking sovereign citizens for many years. A 2020 START research brief estimated that approximately 30% of all far-right extremists, in their Profiles of Individual Radicalization in the United States (PIRUS) database, “…are or were members of the sovereign citizen movement, antigovernment militias and/or express anti-government views” (Jensen, Yates, & Kane, 2020, p.2). The best estimates, indicate that in the U.S., there are approximately 300,000 to 500,000 sovereign citizens and their numbers are expected to grow (Southern Poverty Law Center, n.d.).

If government organizations are tracking sovereign citizens, infor- mation gathered may be classified and not available to the public. Recent reports indicate that the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) tracks domestic terrorism (Swan, 2019). Whether or not they track sovereign citizens is unknown. It would seem that both the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) track sovereign citizens to some degree, given that they both offer detailed definitions of the group. The FBI defines sovereign citizens as “individuals who openly reject their US citizenship status, believe that most forms of established government, authority, and institutions are illegitimate, and seek, wholly or in part, through unlawful acts of force or violence, to further their claim to be immune from government au- thority. The mere advocacy of political or social positions, political activism, use of strong rhetoric, or generalized philosophic embrace of violent tactics may not constitute extremism and may be constitutionally protected” (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2017, p.2). Their definition seemingly differentiates sovereigns who are in favor of violence versus those who actually commit violence in furtherance of their ideology.

The DHS definition is narrower and focuses only on sovereign citizen extremists which they define as “groups or individuals who facilitate or engage in acts of violence directed at public officials, financial in- stitutions, and government facilities in support of their belief that the legitimacy of the U.S. citizenship should be rejected, almost all forms of established government, authority, and institutions are illegitimate and that they are immune from federal, state and local laws” (U.S. Depart- ment of Homeland Security, 2014, p. 1). The DHS seems focused on sovereign citizens who engage in violence, as opposed to those who may believe in violence philosophically, but who have yet to engage in violence.

This paper defines sovereign citizens in accordance with the FBI and the DHS. This paper also takes the position that any individual who is legally considered to be a citizen of the U.S. and who simultaneously believes that the U.S. is not a legitimate government, and as a result of that illegitimacy, believes themselves to be immune to all U.S. laws, is to be considered a sovereign citizen. These defined individuals may refer to themselves as something other than sovereign citizens and often do. One does not need to consider themselves a sovereign citizen to be a sover- eign citizen. Other names sovereigns may call themselves include: freeman on the land, flesh and blood human being, natural man, free person, sovereign man, layman, a natural person, a freedom of common- law citizen, and other names. The core belief of sovereign citizens, is their proclaiming the American government to be illegitimate.

1.2. Profile of a sovereign citizen

Sovereign citizens are most widely known for paper terrorism. One set of researchers examined the financial crimes among members of the far-right extremist movement. Utilizing the U.S. Extremist Financial Crime Database, Sullivan et al. (2019) identified 215 schemes among 368 individual offenders. Of those 215 schemes, approximately one- third of their sample included sovereign citizens. Most of the sover- eign citizens were middle-aged, white males living in the southern re- gion of the U.S. (Sullivan et al., 2019).

An ADL special report from 2010, indicates that demographically, many sovereigns are white, middle-aged or older, with leaders being in their 60s or 70s. The biggest growth, according to the ADL, has occurred among African Americans, many of whom identify as Moorish sovereign

citizens, or Moors or Muurs. This particular movement is said to have accelerated since the 1990s, particularly in the East Coast areas of the U. S. (Pitcavage, as cited in Moorish sovereign citizens, n.d.; Parker, 2018).

There exists very little research concerning Moorish sovereign citi- zens. There are only two articles, one by Parker (2018) and Dew (2016). Parker (2018) discusses the beliefs of Moors and his interactions with them, as a competency evaluator for the court system. Dew (2016) traces the history of the Moorish Science Temple of America (MSTA), a reli- gious sect that has existed since 1913, that is sometimes co-opted by Moorish sovereign citizens as attempted cover for their illegal activities. MSTA leaders take issue with the sovereign citizens Moors, for their fraudulently claiming to be members of their sect (NBC Washington, 2017). One of the biggest differences between Moorish sovereign citi- zens and non-Moorish sovereign citizens, is that Moors believe that they were the first inhabitants in America. This is used as a rationale for their belief that they are entitled to special privileges such as immunity from U.S. laws and not having to register their vehicles. Non-Moorish sover- eign citizens, also believe they are entitled to special privileges.

Moors are more organized that their non-Moor, sovereign citizen counterparts. They tend to commit different types of crimes, though there are commonalities. Though their rationales may differ, both Moors and traditional sovereign citizens believe they are above the law.

In 2017, the FBI produced its first intelligence report analyzing acts of violence involving individuals in both the sovereign citizen extremist movement and the black identity extremist (BIE) movement. They focused on six attacks occurring since 2014, four of which they judged to be influenced by a mix of the two movements. Some governments refer to this combination as blended extremists (New Jersey Office of Homeland Security and Preparedness, 2016). Essentially, a BIE is defined as an individual who is motivated to commit violence “in response to perceived racism and injustice in American society…” (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2017, p.2). The FBI noted that gener- ally BIE violence is rare but felt it was important to warn law enforce- ment against this violence. The FBI was criticized for its identification of BIEs and has since stopped using the BIE label (Tau, 2019).

1.3. The sovereign citizen movement spread to other countries

Though the focus of this article concerns sovereign citizens in the U. S., it is important to acknowledge that it is a worldwide phenomenon. Sovereign citizens have been tracked in Canada, United Kingdom, Scotland, Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland, New Zealand, and South Africa (Netolitzky, 2018). More recently, there is evidence that the sovereign citizen movement is present in several other countries. In Australia, for instance, a leaked 2015 counterterrorism report indicated that there were approximately 300 sovereign citizens in New South Wales (NSW) and that they should be considered a … “potential terrorist threat” (Baldino & Lucas, 2019, p.251). Sovereigns in Australia, much like in Canada, call themselves “freeman on the land,” and a number of political candidates have made claims and have utilized tactics seem- ingly consistent with the sovereign citizen movement (Baldino & Lucas, 2019). In June 2020, four members of a sovereign group “New West- ralia” broke into a historic courthouse and took up residence (Hedley, 2020). Social media posts indicated that their goal was to establish themselves as the “proper governing body of law for Western Australia” (Hedley, 2020, para. 7).

In another example involving Australia, Mark Pytellek, a well-known sovereign citizen and his wife, were running a Facebook group crusading against a new rule mandating flu vaccines for those who were visiting individuals in aged care homes (Wilson, 2020). The couple was selling an online service that charges a fee to add their name to a form letter titled “Vaccine Non Consent Document Creator” to be sent to Australian officials (Wilson, 2020). In addition, they are also encouraging users to pay $69.99 annually for access to a website called Solutions Empow- erment that teaches sovereign rights and other secret strategies (Wilson, 2020). Mr. Pytellek has a record of legal trouble with authorities in

C.M. Sarteschi

Aggression and Violent Behavior 60 (2021) 101509

3

Australia. In a video from Singapore, dated May 2020, there appears to be a

sovereign citizen female yelling “I am not a person, I am sovereign” when confronted by police for refusing to wear a mask in public and for breaching safe social distancing measures, under COVID-19 regulations (Koay, 2019). In Russia, individuals calling themselves “citizens of the U.S.S.R.” or “soviet citizens” are claiming they do not have to follow the laws of the Russian federation nor do they recognize it as a legitimate legal body (Luxmoore, 2019). Much like the sovereign citizen movement in the U.S., many “soviet citizens” are learning how to supposedly evade laws via the internet. YouTube, in particular, has channels with thou- sands of followers (Luxmoore, 2019). One popular channel claims to offer “practical tips and advice for citizens of the USSR” in how they can “legally avoid paying off debt” (Luxmoore, 2019, para. 14). That video, as of May 2019, had 2.8 million views (Luxmoore, 2019).

Germany’s version of the sovereign citizen movement is known as Reichsbürgers or the Reich Citizens movement. Estimated to number approximately 19,000 individuals, across the country, they believe the laws of both Imperial Germany and Nazi Germany still apply (The Sun, 2020). They also print their own passports, refuse to pay taxes and engage in paper terrorism (Gauvey Herbert, 2020). Some are prone to violence. Former Mister Germany, Adrian Ursache, a prominent member of the Reich Citizens movement, shot and killed a police officer in 2016. He had declared his property an independent state and when police tried to evict him from his “independent state” he attempted to kill them (The Sun, 2020). Two months later, one of Urache’s followers, Wolfgang Plan, shot at police as they attempted to remove his weapons. One officer died and two officers were injured during the incident. Mr. Plan was sentenced to life in prison.

One exceptional Reichsbürger case is that of Peter Pitzek. He refers to himself as the King of Germany, and claims dominion over 1300 subjects (Gauvey Herbert, 2020). He was able to convince dozens of individuals to live on a compound in Wittenberg, Germany. They all gave him money, some their entire life savings. He amassed millions of dollars. He opened his own bank and was collecting deposits until German au- thorities shut it down. Upon investigation, the authorities were only able to locate a small amount of money on his property. Investigators concluded that the self-proclaimed King of Germany had spent most of the money on himself, in the form of travel, cars and real estate. The rest, they estimated, had been laundered through a network of companies and then hidden in countries that lacked extradition treaties with Ger- many. He went to trial and was convicted. None of the money was ever recovered. After about a year in prison, an appeals court overturned his conviction. No longer incarcerated, he has since acquired new money- making ventures. More than 70 companies, for a fee, have incorpo- rated in his kingdom. Much like in Australia, members of the far-right political establishment in Germany have been adopting some of the language of the Reichsbürger movement, suggesting that these ideas have gone mainstream. German authorities have been trying to crack down on the illegal activities of the Reichsbürgers, but only with limited success (Gauvey Herbert, 2020).

1.4. Where do individuals learn about the movement?

Sovereign citizen-hood is spread via the Internet, particularly on YouTube. There are millions of videos on the topic. The sovereign citizen message is also spread through jails and prisons, typically via mailers and word of mouth. The Marshall Project described a sovereign citizen scheme operating in prisons. Legitimate-sounding companies claim that the U.S. government is holding all prisoners for financial reasons and that for an initial fee of $4000, they will initiate a bond process that will ultimately earn a prisoner their freedom (Thompson, 2019). Bond pro- cess, also known as straw man, redemption or accepted for value schemes, involve the use of fraudulent financial documents that appear legitimate (FBI, n.d.). Many unsuspecting victims find out, after the fact, that the bond process is simply an illegitimate money-making scheme.

A number of high-profile individuals have attempted to use sover- eign citizen strategies in courts, but none have been successful. One example is Jared Fogle, the former spokesperson for the Subway sand- wich restaurant chain, who declared himself a sovereign citizen in court filings. In one instance, he was attempting to correct an “error” regarding subject matter jurisdiction, essentially questioning the court’s authority to render a verdict (Bever, 2017). Mr. Vogel pled guilty, in 2015, for receiving child pornography and for traveling and attempting to elicit sexual conduct with a minor. He was sentenced to 15 years in federal prison (Bever, 2017). All of his sovereign citizen arguments have been deemed frivolous and rejected by the court (Evans, 2017).

Some learn about the many supposed advantages of sovereign citizen-hood via a number of gurus peddling seminars, promising the ability to emancipate oneself from the federal government (Pitcavage, 2012). For instance, The New York Times profiled Sean David Morton, a sovereign citizen who taught workshops claiming instant debt relief from mortgages, tax bills and student loans (Powers, 2019). David Wynn Miller, another tax protester/sovereign citizen guru, and his adherents, claimed that the government cannot tax their income because they are individuals without citizenship and thus are sovereign unto themselves (United States v. Kriemelmeyer, 2006). Mr. Wynn Miller went a step further than many other gurus and invented his own dialect called “In the Truth.” This dialect, he claimed, is based on mathematics, and is characterized by an overuse of prepositional phrases, hyphens, and co- lons and avoids the use of verbs, pronouns, adjectives, and adverbs (United States v. Kriemelmeyer, 2006). Mr. Wynn Miller has since passed away but his tactics live on and are attempted by other sovereign citizens.

1.5. The radicalization of sovereign citizens

Carson et al. (2019) traced the evolution of the radicalization of Jerry Jr. and Joseph Kane, the father and son responsible for the killing of the aforementioned two West Memphis, Arkansas police officers in 2010. Jerry Kane had lost a child to sudden infant syndrome (SIDS) and became angry at the government after they insisted upon an autopsy. He subsequently became involved with the Dorean group, a company much like Sean David Morton’s company, who offered seminars about debt relief and gaining freedom from government. Mr. Kane initially was a strong supporter of the Dorean group, promoting their materials, but that changed after experiencing a number of legal problems. He even- tually quit the group and started his own seminars. His seminars often included his advocating extreme violence, including the killing of In- ternal Revenue Service (IRS) agents. His violent rhetoric prompted the FBI to open an investigation. He increasingly has had more run-ins with law enforcement. His son Joseph took a similar stance against the gov- ernment. Even as a young child, he had trouble with the law and was known to be disrespectful, problematic and defiant (Carson et al., 2019).

Joseph, then 16, was with his father on the morning of May 20, 2010, when they were pulled over for having unusual license plates (Dewan & Hubbell, 2010). While his father was speaking with officers, Joseph acquired his assault rifle and began shooting, killing both officers. The Kanes then fled the scene and were later killed in a gunfire exchange with police.

Taking a standardized approach to understanding the intension to carry out individual acts of targeted violence, Challacombe and Lucas (2019) evaluated whether the Terrorism Radicalization Assessment Protocol (TRAP-18) could retrospectively predict violence among a group of sovereign citizens. The TRAP-18 is comprised of eight warning behaviors and 10 distal characteristics, essentially combining the work of threat assessment and psychosocial factors associated with lone actor violence (Meloy & Gill, 2016). Their sample consisted of 58 individuals from the U.S. associated with the sovereign citizens movement between 2004 and 2014. It was determined that 30 individuals or groups had planned or committed violent or dangerous actions and 28 individuals were judged to have engaged in nonviolent criminal actions. Their

C.M. Sarteschi

Aggression and Violent Behavior 60 (2021) 101509

4

results indicated that the TRAP-18 measure successfully distinguished between sovereign citizens who were violent from those who were not. The researchers found that individuals with higher TRAP-18 scores were two times more likely to be involved in committing an act of violence compared to those with lower scores. Six warning behaviors (pathway, identification, novel aggression, energy burst, leakage, and last resort) and four distal behaviors (personal grievance, framed by ideology, greater creativity, and criminal violence) significantly postpredicted violence in their research (Challacombe & Lucas, 2019).

1.6. Mental health

For those unfamiliar with sovereign citizens, their behavior can seem odd, bizarre, confusing, and seemingly indicative of mental illness. This may explain why judges, after dealing with their disruptive behavior in the courtroom, frequently request mental health evaluations, to deter- mine competency. In the literature, there are four studies to date, regarding the mental health of sovereign citizens and their fitness to stand trial. All of them seem to suggest that the vast majority of sover- eign citizens are not mentally ill and are competent to stand trial.

Pytyck and Chaimowitz (2013) took a case study approach, while analyzing two cases of sovereign citizens who were referred to the court for mental health assessment. One was a male and one was a female. In both cases, they refused to cooperate with officers before their arrests and were uncooperative in court, thus prompting their competency evaluations. Both were deemed competent to stand trial. The authors argue that, in their view, the majority of sovereign citizens are not psychotic and are fit to stand trial.

Parker (2014) conducted a retrospective study regarding compe- tence among sovereign citizen defendants undergoing psychiatric eval- uations. In this study, he reported the results of nine cases of individuals, identified as sovereign citizens, who were court-ordered to undergo evaluations of competence to stand trial. Of the nine, three refused to participate in clinical interviews. Their average age was approximately 39 years old, had at least a high school education. The majority were African-American and eight of the nine defendants were male. Though two of the six had histories of mental health treatment, none showed significant cognitive deficits or had any history of psychosis. One defendant received a diagnosis of delusional disorder and another for depression. Three received diagnoses of substance abuse disorders; one had no diagnosis. The defendant who received the delusional disorder diagnosis was deemed incompetent to stand trial, however, Parker later came to believe that this defendant did not truly meet the criteria for delusional disorder and was competent to stand trial. In his view, those who adhere to the sovereign citizen belief system are mostly likely not delusional and are instead, exhibiting an extremist political philosophy. Parker argues that being a sovereign citizen alone is not enough to warrant a mental health diagnosis or a judgment of incompetence (Parker, 2014).

Parker reiterated that same sentiment in his 2018 review of a Brooklyn-based study of sovereign citizens in court. Paradis et al. (2018) retrospectively reviewed 36 criminal cases of sovereign citizens who had undergone competency evaluations. Much like the 2014 Parker study, most of their sample was middle-aged, reasonably well-educated, Afri- can-American, and male (Parker’s study had one female). Six of the 36 claimed to be Moors or Muurs, a subgroup of sovereign citizens who hold different beliefs but who engage in many of the same illegal tactics. Consistent with Parker’s, 2014 findings, none of the Brooklyn sample of sovereign citizens were psychotic and the majority were deemed competent to stand trial. The four studies available, thus far, support the notion that the majority of sovereign citizens are not diagnosably mentally ill or unfit to stand trial. Sovereign citizens who are diagnos- ably ill and thus unfit to stand trial, are the exception rather than the rule. More research is needed to understand why sovereign citizens adopt such extremist beliefs.

1.7. Legal response to sovereign citizens

A good deal of information about sovereign citizens was found in legal review articles. Four legal articles were identified through this review. Perhaps one of the most cited articles, in U.S. legal opinions, was by Loeser (2015) which provides a thorough examination of sovereign citizens as paper terrorists, the problems they cause in the courtroom and the danger they pose to public officials. Loeser (2015) recommends a number of legal and educational solutions for stopping the sovereign citizen threat including deterrence through effective punishment, pre- filing injunctions, procedural justice, online activism, and education about the history of government. Likewise, the remaining articles (Kalinowski, 2019) educate the reader about the nature and beliefs of sovereign citizens, in addition to examining the rationale for why sov- ereign citizens often wish to represent themselves in court (Phillips, 2016).

The most expansive and thorough article was that of Netolitzky (2018), who serves as the Complex Litigant Management Council for Canada’s Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench. One might consider it a seminal article on the phenomenon of pseudolaw. Netolitzky (2018) examines the origins, beliefs and patterns of pseudolaw, arguing that understanding the reasoning and motives behind sovereign citizen tac- tics provides valuable psychological insight. He speculates that the key to deterring sovereign citizens, and those with related ideologies, might lie in emphasizing deradicalization and reintegration strategies, much like those used with Islamic extremists (Netolitzky, 2018).

1.8. Sovereign citizen threat to law enforcement

Sovereign citizens are hazardous to law enforcement but how much and under what circumstances are not well understood. One study by Gruenewald et al., 2016, examined cases of LEOs killed by far-right extremists. Of the 30 cases, 40% were perpetrated by either antigov- ernment offenders or those who were sovereign citizens, though the researchers did not specify which of the 40% were sovereigns and which were merely labeled antigovernment. Their analysis also revealed that the family members of sovereigns often share the same belief system, are typically armed and may be willing to use deadly violence against law enforcement (Gruenewald et al., 2016).

2. Method

In an effort to examine that threat more closely, open-source infor- mation was searched to capture instances when: 1) sovereign citizens attempted to harm, did harm or who killed LEOs; and 2) sovereign cit- izens who threatened to harm LEOs. The focus on all forms of violence directed at police, including those who make threats, was collected in an attempt to gain a fuller picture of the dangers faced by LEOs from sov- ereign citizens. Sierra-Arévalo and Nix (in press), for instance, found that between 79 and 86% of firearm assaults on police do not result in the death of an officer. Focusing on only the most extreme cases, risks underestimating the full scope of dangers associated with policing (Si- erra-Arévalo and Nix, in press). Cases were searched for in the following locations and outlets: Google alerts, law enforcement press releases, social media, Anti-Defamation League (ADL) reports, Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) reports, the Global Terrorism Database developed by The National Consortium For The Study of Terrorism and Responses To Terrorism (START) at the University of Maryland, the personal website kept by Daryl Johnson, former U.S. federal intelligence analyst for the Department of Homeland Security, the Center for Investigative Report- ing, and the personal website of J.J. McNabb, a journalist who closely tracks the criminal acts of sovereign citizens and members of other extremist organizations. Also searched was the legal database LexisUni, which curates and archives legal news and court cases.

C.M. Sarteschi

Aggression and Violent Behavior 60 (2021) 101509

5

Table 1 Successful and unsuccessful sovereign citizen violence towards police.

Date State Name Circumstances No. of casualties

1. Feb/June 1983

North Dakota/ Arkansas

Gordon Kahl 2 different armed standoffs 3 officers killed; 4 officers wounded

2. October 1993 Alabama George Everette Sibley and Linda Lyon-Block

Parking lot attack 1 officer killed

3. June 1995 Ohio Michael Hill Traffic stop attack 1 officer killed 4. September

1995 Connecticut Ed Thrall Fired gun at police during standoff 0 officers wounded

5. January 1996 Ohio Larry Martz Traffic stop attack; assaulted officer 1 officer wounded 6. February

1996 Louisiana Lynn Truman Crawford Standoff after attempted arrest, suspect had gun 1 officer wounded by suspects dog

7. August 1997 Connecticut Carl Drega Traffic stop attack 2 officers killed; 3 officers wounded

8. September 1997

Idaho Craig and Doug Brodrick

Traffic stop attack 1 officer killed; 1 officer wounded

9. December 1999

Texas John Joe Gray Accused of biting a state trooper 1 officer wounded

10. August 2002 Ohio Donald Matthews Traffic stop attack 1 officer killed 11. July 2003 Michigan Scott Woodring Armed standoff; shot state trooper after ordered to come out of vehicle 1 officer killed 12. December

2003 South Carolina Arthur Bixby (and

family) Armed standoff over land 2 officers killed

13. March 2008 Wisconsin Robert Bayliss Fired at officers during eviction 0 officers wounded 14. May 2010 Arkansas Jerry and Joseph Kane Traffic stop attack 2 officers killed 15. June 2010 Florida Brody James Whitaker Fired shots at officers during police chase 0 officers wounded 16. September

2010 Texas Victor White Officers shot during violent confrontation 3 officers shot and wounded

17. June 2011 Arizona William Foust Suspect attempted to wrestle officer’s taser from him 1 officer wounded 18. June 2011 North Dakota Rodney Brossart Suspect’s sons pointed guns at officers attempting search warrant, female

family member physically hit an officer 0 officers wounded

19. July 2011 Texas James Michael Tesi Shot officer during traffic stop 1 officer wounded 20. August 2012 Louisiana Terry Smith, Brian

Lynn Smith (and others)

Ambushed officers inside trailer 2 officers killed; 1 officer wounded

21. September 2012

California Christopher Boone Lacy

Traffic stop attack 1 officer killed

22. October 2012

Tennessee Tabitha Gentry Tried to run over officers during traffic stop 2 officers wounded

23. October 2012

New Mexico Tod Bartels Suspect gets out of vehicle, started ramming patrol vehicles with it, then slammed a state patrolman’s hand in his Jeep door during attempted arrest

2 officers wounded; injuries unclear

24. November 2012

Indiana Derrick Berry Attacked officers during step-son’s traffic stop; claimed had supreme authority to kill police officer

Injuries unclear

25. December 2012

Idaho Mitchell Lee Walck Shooting at Idaho State Trooper 0 officers wounded

26. February 2013

New York Carl Clark Rammed stolen vehicle into police vehicle 1 officer wounded

27. March 2013 Florida Jeffrey Allen Wright While attempting to arrest him for counterfeiting charges, he barricaded himself in his garage, saying that he would not be “a servant to a king;” suspect fired a shot and pointed gun at SWAT officers

0 officers wounded

28. June 2013 Colorado Lewis Pollard During an attempt to serve a warrant, suspect started yelling at them from inside home, pulled out a semi-automatic handgun and pointed it at police, prompting their use of deadly force

0 officers wounded

29. August 2013 California David McCormick Assaulted coast guard officer who boarded his vessel 1 officer wounded 30. December

2013 South Carolina Christopher Reames Traffic stop attack 2 officers shot and wounded

31. March 2014 Ohio Israel Rondon Shot at police during eviction (previous conviction of assaulting an officer)

0 officers wounded (during shoot out); 1 officer wounded during previous assault

32. March 2014 Ohio Monica Greer Justice Assaulted officer during an arrest for a warrant 1 officer wounded 33. May 2014 Alaska Arvin & Nathaniel

Kangas Officers shot during violent confrontation 2 officers shot and wounded

34. May 2014 Texas Harvey Leelance Searcy Assaulted police officer 1 officer wounded 35. June 2014 Georgia Dennis Marx Officer shot outside courthouse by suspect armed with an assault rifle,

grenades, various kinds of ammunition, his own water supply, flexible handcuffs, body armor and a gas mask

1 officer shot and wounded

36. June 2014 Nevada Jared and Amanda Miller

Ambushed officers eating in restaurant 2 officers killed

37. June 2014 Florida Dustin Heathman Fired at officers while they were trying to serve a warrant 0 officers wounded 38. June 2014 California Brent Douglas Cole Disagreement with federal Rangers on Bureau of Land Management

property 2 officers shot and wounded

39. June 2014 Oregon Earl Cranston Harris Suspect retreated to bedroom and acquired a shotgun during eviction. After refusing to put down gun, deadly force was used

0 officers wounded

40. July 2014 Ohio Tyshawn Hancock Probation officer shot while attempting arrest 1 officer shot and wounded 41. August 2014 Texas Douglas Leguin Ambushed officers (and fire rescue) responding to fire call 0 officers wounded

Florida Curtis Wade Holley Set fire to house with intent to ambush first responders

(continued on next page)

C.M. Sarteschi

Aggression and Violent Behavior 60 (2021) 101509

6

Table 1 (continued )

Date State Name Circumstances No. of casualties

42. November 2014

1 officer killed; 1 officer shot and wounded

43. December 2014

Florida Robert Lawrence Suspect killed by officer following a scuffle outside animal shelter; refused to produce driver’s license during attempt to leave stray dog. During scuffle with police, suspect grabbed taser from officers and was attempting to use it on them. Officers determined he was an immediate threat and deadly force was used

Injuries unclear

44. February 2015

Florida Joseph Paffen Opened fire on a vehicle containing four deputies inside 1 officer shot and wounded; 1 officer wounded with flying glass

45. March 2015 Minnesota David Blanshan Suspect resisted arrest during traffic stop 1 officer wounded 46. March 2015 Missouri David Michael Hagler Had discussed plans to kill police; booby-trapped his two side-by side

homes “inside and out” meant to endanger the lives of police 0 officers wounded

47. August 2015 Georgia Dustin Lee Gunnells During a struggle to remove suspect from vehicle, reached for gun multiple times during traffic stop

1 officer wounded

48. November 2015

Arizona Paul Tice He and his sons are known for having repeated confrontations with police; during one instance, officers attempted to pull him over, but he would not stop. When he eventually did, he placed a handgun on the dashboard, a move that was interpreted as an act of intimidation aimed at arresting officers

0 officers wounded

49. May 2016 Missouri Marcus Paden Assaulted officer during traffic stop 1 officer wounded 50. July 2016 Louisiana Gavin Long Ambushed officers 3 officers killed; 3 officers shot and

wounded 51. August 2016 Maryland Korryn Gaines Pointed gun at police and threatened to kill them if they did not leave.

They were attempting to serve arrest warrant for failing to appear in court

0 officers wounded

52. September 2016

Arizona Marc Payne Attempted to run over three officers with vehicle 3 officers wounded

53. September 2016

Texas Moses King Tried to speed away during traffic stop, ramming car into two squad cars, nearly hitting officers, then again tried to hit officers with car

0 officers wounded

54. September 2016

Michigan Richard Parent Sped away from traffic stop, led officers on a chase during which officer was wounded; suspect got out of vehicle and went into firing stance with handgun pointed at officers

1 officer wounded

55. September 2016

Louisiana James Webb Reached for firearm during traffic stop 0 officers wounded

56. January 2017

Florida Markeith Lloyd Shot officer during gun battle in supermarket parking lot 1 officer killed

57. June 2017 Tennessee Alexander Ray Johnson Traffic stop attack; suspect bit officer’s tip of his thumb off 2 officers wounded 58. August 2017 Florida Everett Glenn Miller Officers shot during routine check 2 officers killed 59. August 2017 Indiana John Jones Bey Shot at three officers during eviction 0 officers wounded 60. September

2017 California Vincent Hernandez Shot at officers during eviction 0 officers wounded

December 2017 North Carolina Shane Allen Grant Shoved officer trying to flee traffic stop 1 officer wounded 61. February

2018 Georgia Tierre Guthrie Officer shot while serving warrant 1 officer killed; two officers

wounded 62. March 2018 New Jersey Sean Shaw Combative with officers during traffic stop, striking one officer with close

fists 1 officer wounded

63. March 2018 Minnesota Melody Gray & Domonique Crayton

Pointed gun at officer’s head during instance when officers tried to assist car in ditch, pulled the trigger but bullet did not come out

0 officers wounded

64. May 2018 Wyoming David Wolosin Officer shot while responding to suspect teaching infant to drive a vehicle 1 officer shot and wounded 65. July 2018 Oklahoma John Terry Chatman Suspect shot officer during arrest at a local Quik Trip 1 officer shot and wounded 66. December

2018 Pennsylvania Janay Rebecca Smith Officer dragged by suspect’s car 1 officer wounded

67. February 2019

Minnesota Dennis Duane Vann Traffic stop where suspect specifically said he would kill multiple officers; recovered “pig-shaped” explosive device in RV vehicle that had ‘(expletive the police)’ written on it

0 officers wounded

68. June 2019 Wisconsin Davarius Riggins Officers attacked while protecting domestic violence victim 4 officers wounded 69. September

2019 Oregon Gregory Lee Rodvelt Booby-trapped home with explosives, FBI agent shot in leg by rigged

wheelchair/Ambush 1 officer shot and wounded

70. September 2019

Missouri Chad Lee Moore Officer attacked during arrest 1 officer shot and wounded

71. January 2020

Oklahoma Sammie Markeith Young

Tried to run over officer with vehicle at traffic stop 0 officers wounded

72. January 2020

Ohio Derrick J. Lewis Suspect shot at officers three times during 13-h standoff 0 officers wounded

73. May 2020 Oregon Caleb Zink Officer bit on hand by suspect resisting arrest 1 officer wounded 74. July 21,

2020 Ohio Monica Greer Justice Barricaded self in home after police came to serve a warrant for a mental

health evaluation 2 officers shot and wounded

C.M. Sarteschi

Aggression and Violent Behavior 60 (2021) 101509

7

3. Results

Table 1 shows that of the 75 instances in which sovereign citizens attempted to harm or did harm LEOs, there were 27 LEOs killed by sovereign citizens between 1983 and July 2020. Officers killed at traffic stops, accounted for eight of the 27 (30%) deaths. Eight officers (30%) were killed during ambushes, six officers (22%) were killed during po- lice standoffs, four officers’ (15%) deaths occurred while doing routine checks or serving a warrant, and one officer (3%) was killed in a gun battle in a grocery store parking lot.

Aside from the 27 deaths, there were an additional 65 LEOs who were wounded. Many of the sites of the violence were traffic stops, ambushes, courthouses, parking lots, and others. Examples of the violence, ranged from a police officer who had his thumb bitten off, to an officer shot and wounded at a gas station. In another incident, December 2018, a sovereign citizen was pulled over for failing to come to a stop at multiple stop signs. Upon requesting her driver’s license, the driver stated that she did not need a license because she was not “trafficking goods nor at commerce,” a common claim among sovereign citizens (Pennsylvania v. Smith, 2020, para. 3). She did provide a self-created identification card and claimed to be an American National. After questioning the officer’s authority, she was asked to exit her vehicle, a request that she refused (Rellahan, 2020). While attempting to forcibly remove her from the vehicle, an officer’s arm became entangled with hers as she drove away, dragging the officer 10 to 15 ft (Pennsylvania v. Smith, 2020). She then fled, driving at a high rate of speed, eventually being apprehended. After a three-day trial, she was convicted of aggravated assault (Rellahan, 2020).

3.1. Gregory Lee Rodvelt

Some of the cases involving sovereign citizens attacks on LEOs are quite unusual and elaborate. Consider the case of Gregory Lee Rodvelt. In September 2018, law enforcement arrived at the scene of his home in Williams, Oregon. According to the affidavit, the team soon learned that Mr. Rodvelt had booby-trapped the property (United States v. Rodvelt, 2018). Upon arrival the officers approached a gate. They noticed a cir- cular hot tub spa that was rigged in such a way that opening the gate would activate a mechanical trigger propelling the spa to roll towards the person opening the gate. Observers described the apparatus akin to something from the Indiana Jones movie Raiders of the Lost Ark. They also noticed another unusual apparatus on one of the overhead garage doors: a wooden mouse trap, rigged to discharge a shotgun blast if the garage door were to be lifted. Law enforcement then moved forward to gain entry into the property. Inside, they would find more booby-traps. Upon entry, they were surprised by a wheelchair rolling towards them. It then exploded and fired a shotgun shell that hit an FBI agent in the leg. The affidavit noted that Mr. Rodvelt had previously been arrested for domestic violence, DUI, aggravated assault, and possession of explosives and destructive devices. He had no felony convictions at the time of his latest incident.

3.2. Victor White

In September of 2010, the local county sheriff and two employees of a petroleum company knocked on the door of Mr. White (CNN Wire Staff, 2010). They wanted to speak to him about an oil well on his property and inform him that the company owned mineral rights to his land (Mustian, 2010). Mr. White had been blocking the company’s ac- cess roads and leaving notes expressing his unhappiness with the com- pany using certain chemicals to kill weeds (Mustian, 2010). It was his view that they had been poisoning his water (Mustian, 2010). Upon seeing the deputy at his door, Mr. White began shooting, hitting the deputy three times and also hitting one of the company employees in the leg. Mr. White then stole the sheriff’s police vehicle and taunted law enforcement over the police radio (CNN Wire Staff, 2010). Additional

LEOs arrived, and Mr. White then an officer who was part of the sniper unit. After setting his own home on fire, Mr. White surrendered. (CNN Wire Staff, 2010).

News reports indicate that Mr. White had a volatile history. He was attracted to guns at a young age (Mustian, 2010). He liked to practice quick drawing, once even shooting himself in the leg (Mustian, 2010). He joined the military and after his service, worked with his brothers as a pipe layer (Mustian, 2010). Eventually, he was hurt on the job and began living off the money he collected as part of a civil settlement from the injury (Mustian, 2010). Newspaper accounts indicate that he had been arrested in 1993 and charged with kicking in a door (Mustian, 2010).

It was also around that time that he began refusing to pay property taxes on his land. He complained to his family that drivers’ licenses were “unconstitutional” and once pled guilty to driving without a license (Mustian, 2010). He was sued by the school district and other taxing entities. He responded by filing court documents containing various nonsensical antigovernment articles and a bumper sticker that read “fight organized crime, abolish the IRS” (Mustian, 2010). He would also visit the district’s clerk’s office, distributing flyers printed by the “Citi- zens Crime Commission” (Mustian, 2010). The flyers were meant to warn public officials about his contention that they were violating the law and would be standing trial for their crimes. The district’s clerk’s office hired a security guard and installed a panic button after Mr. White explicitly threatened to kill all of their lawyers. (Mustian, 2010). In a 2010 interview, while in jail after his arrest, Mr. White stated that he planned to retaliate against law enforcement via civil lawsuits and reiterated his hatred for law enforcement (Mustian, 2010). In December 2012, he was sentenced to life in prison plus 20 years (Vanderlaan, 2012).

Even in cases where no officer was harmed by sovereign citizens, deadly force was often intended. In March 2018, a vehicle in Minnesota slid off the road due to poor weather conditions. Troopers stopped to assist the two Moorish sovereign citizen occupants and soon learned that the vehicle had been reported stolen. As one of the troopers began to handcuff the male suspect, the female suspect held a 9 mm handgun to his head and pulled the trigger. The gun misfired and no bullet exited the chamber. The trooper acquired his weapon and shot the female suspect in the arm as she ran off. It was later learned she had an active arrest warrant for sex trafficking, along with a history of drug convictions (Delong & Sanchick, 2018).

In an unusual case involving a “free citizen,” (another name for a sovereign citizen), a man refused to leave a mall parking lot. The police determined that he had a revoked driver’s license and a warrant for his arrest. The situation escalated when he refused to leave his vehicle. Upon inspection, the police recovered “a device from the RV that was shaped like a pig and had ‘(expletive) the police’ written on it. The pig held an energetic powder and appeared to be an explosive device” (Venzer, 2019). The man also specifically stated that he would kill multiple officers (Venzer, 2019). No one was harmed in the incident but the threat of harm explicitly directed at LEOs was ever present.

Such was the case with James Michael Tesi, a “natural living being,” who referred to himself as Tesi El of the Moorish National Republic (Pitcavage, 2012). Mr. Tesi is thought to be the only known Caucasian Moor. He has a history of problematic interactions with police due to his belief in “sovereign freedom to travel.” Additionally, he did not think it necessary to follow other traffic laws. He violated seat belt laws, speed limit laws and refused to pay his traffic tickets (Slater, 2016, p. 1). In his latest confrontation with police (July 2011) court records indicate that Mr. Tesi was driving, when police attempted to pull him over for outstanding warrants (Tesi v. Texas, 2014). Mr. Tesi swerved around the police vehicles and drove to his home and parked in his garage (Tesi v. Texas, 2014). Police approached Mr. Tesi who was still in his truck. Mr. Tesi kicked open his driver’s side door, armed with a gun, and began firing at the officer. Gunfire was exchanged and Mr. Tesi was shot in the leg. The police officer was not hit but could have easily been killed or

C.M. Sarteschi

Aggression and Violent Behavior 60 (2021) 101509

8

seriously injured in the shootout. In another instance that could have been deadly for law enforcement,

an officer pulled over Mr. Lewis Pollard for multiple traffic violations. Upon approaching the vehicle, Mr. Pollard became aggressive and hostile, claiming he did not need a driver’s license and that the officer had no authority to detain him. Mr. Pollard informed the officer that he would “recognize the authority of the Sheriff, only when the Sheriff began to recognize the Constitution” (Hautzinger, 2013, p. 5). The of- ficer recognized Mr. Pollard as a sovereign citizen and called for backup. After the second officer arrived, Mr. Pollard drove away and went home. The police tracked the vehicle to his residence and knocked on his door. Mr. Pollard came outside, very upset and animated. Hidden behind his back was a loaded semi-automatic handgun. As he began to aim his firearm at officers, one officer quickly fired at Mr. Pollard, fatally wounding him. The District Attorney regarded their actions as exem- plary and praised their ability to protect themselves and the community (Hautzinger, 2013). That the officers recognized Mr. Pollard as a sov- ereign citizen suggests that they had specialized training, were vigilant and had knowledge of the movement, possibly saving the officers’ lives.

That same sentiment was expressed in the court testimony of a trooper about a routine traffic stop involving a sovereign citizen. On March 29, 2015, a state trooper pulled over two individuals after observing that the male passenger was not wearing a seatbelt. Imme- diately upon requesting identification, the passenger would only give his first and middle name, kept asking for the trooper’s name and badge number and stated several times “I do not choose to loiter with you” (State of Minnesota v. Blanshan, 2017, p, 2). The passenger then buckled his seatbelt and locked the vehicle doors. The trooper immediately called for backup and when it arrived, the two occupants were forcibly removed from the vehicle. The scuffle with the sovereign citizen caused minor injuries to the trooper but the circumstances could have been much worse. In his testimony about the incident, the trooper explained that his training and experience allowed him to recognize the passenger as a sovereign citizen which “heightened [his] sense of security” and made him think about “what could potentially happen (State of Min- nesota v. Blanshan, 2017, p. 4). His training might have saved his life.

Sovereign citizen deadly violence against LEOs, has also occurred during the course of an ambush. In this research, Table 1 reveals six instances in which LEOs were ambushed by sovereign citizens, leading to the death of eight LEOs, with an additional six LEOs wounded. Schouten and Brennan (2016) explain that there are two kinds of am- bushes: entrapment and spontaneous. Entrapment ambushes involve a victim being lured into a trap and is predatory in nature. This style of attack can involve stalking LEOs as a group with the goal of an attack without choosing specific victims in advance (Schouten & Brennan, 2016). Spontaneous ambushes are crimes of opportunity and occur without much forethought (Schouten & Brennan, 2016). They are reactive and are triggered by the circumstances of the situation. All six ambush cases in this research were classified as entrapment. The per- petrators were intending to harm LEOs via directed, targeted violence.

Two well-known sovereign citizen cases of entrapment style am- bushes are Gavin Long in Baton Rouge, Louisiana who shot six police officers, three of whom died, and Jered and Amanda Miller, who shot and killed two Las Vegas LEOs at a pizza restaurant. Evidence suggests both of those were well planned, targeted events meant to kill LEOs. The same can be said for the aforementioned case of Gregory Rodvelt, whose elaborate planning involved bombs and booby traps, designed explicitly to harm LEOs.

A final case example illustrates a lesser-known example of targeted violence against police by a sovereign citizen. Curtis Wade Holley intentionally set his house on fire before asking his neighbor to call 911 and thus lure first responders to the scene with the intention of killing them. (Etters, 2015). The first deputy on the scene was Chris Smith who was shot immediately upon arrival (Etters, 2015). Another officer was shot but survived because of his bulletproof vest.

People who knew Mr. Holley, reported that he had repeatedly spoken

about his intention to kill as many LEOs as possible. He was known to be volatile, to hate the government and to read propaganda online (Etters, 2015). An investigation revealed that two weeks prior to the shooting, Mr. Holley had explicitly threatened to shoot LEOs if they came to his residence (Rossman & Portman, 2014). The day before the shooting, his ex-girlfriend had called local authorities to report his threats (Etters, 2015). None of that information was shared with first responders (Rossman & Portman, 2014).

3.3. Threats to harm law enforcement

Table 2 documents 19 instances in which sovereign citizens threat- ened to harm law enforcement. Some sovereigns made threats in the course of an armed standoff or in elaborate plots designed to target law enforcement, some willing to die for their cause. David Allen Brutsche and Devon Campbell Newman, for instance, plotted to kidnap a LEO and hold their victim hostage in a makeshift jail. After the kidnapping, the duo planned to hold a trial and then “put a bullet in his head” (Powers, 2015, para. 6). “I’m willing to give my life for this” (Powers, 2015, para. 1). Undercover officers thwarted their plan before it could be carried out (Valley, 2013).

Some sovereigns brazenly contact law enforcement and explicitly threaten them via a phone call, private social media messaging or by posting it on public social media accounts. Such was the case for Michael Hall who was cited by the police for driving an unregistered and unin- sured vehicle (Labella, 2018). He sent them private messages, putting the police “on notice” for their having violated his constitutional rights, writing that he will “travel freely upon any public road in any public highway I please until the day I die” and that he had “the right to kill a cop (Labella, 2018, para 2 and 3). In another instance, Mitchell Taebel, a known sovereign citizen with a long-troubled history, was arrested after leading law enforcement on a high-speed chase (Pohl, 2018). Two per- sons were severely injured, during the chase, when his vehicle slammed in to theirs. In a press conference, and on a number of other occasions, he stated, that the officers involved should have been killed and that he had the right to kill them under specific sections of the Uniform Crime Code (Pohl, 2018). His actions are in line with many sovereign citizens who often cite the U.S. Constitution or common law statues that they inter- pret as supporting their antigovernment and anti-authority agendas.

4. Discussion

This article sought to provide an overview of sovereign citizens, summarize the empirical research about the movement and to explore the threat they pose to law enforcement. To date, there are relatively few studies of sovereign citizens. This may be due to the fact that very few were aware of this group before the year 2010, (M. Pitcavage, personal communication, February 1, 2018). Most of the research about sover- eigns has been conducted by a small number of journalists and “watchdog” organizations.

In addition, sovereign citizens are not a monothetic or ideologically pure group. Their ideology oftentimes overlaps with other groups including militias, antigovernment groups, and patriot/white suprem- acy groups. Others with overlapping philosophies include the Black Panther party, scientology, anti-vaccination, dooms day preppers, and other movements. This complicates counterterrorism efforts that have traditionally “focus[ed] on leadership decapitation and targeting orga- nizational logistics and finances…” (Hoffman & Ware, 2020, para.30). Sovereign citizens, like some other groups, are decentralized and have “…no identifiable leaders, no existing organization and no infrastruc- ture to disrupt” (Hoffman & Ware, 2020, para.30) thus making identi- fication and prevention a formidable task. Further complicating matters, is the lack of governmental authority to clarify issues of operational definition and ideology. Without such guidance, accurate accounting, especially among those without access to classified intelligence, be- comes a greater challenge.

C.M. Sarteschi

Aggression and Violent Behavior 60 (2021) 101509

9

Studies concerning the sovereign citizen movement thus far have largely focused on legal matters, mental health, radicalization, and postdiction of targeted violence. Emerging evidence suggests that most sovereign citizens are not delusional or mentally ill. Their behavior defies easy diagnostic categorization and requires further study. Their beliefs, though atypical in nature, are largely not indicative of disor- dered thought. Some sovereign citizens are motivated to commit violence for reasons that have yet to be fully explored. Rahman et al. (2019) have applied the concept of extreme overvalued belief to lone- actor terrorism and individual acts of targeted violence. Whether sov- ereign citizen ideology should be understood as an extreme, overvalued belief, will require more in-depth study. Understanding what motivates sovereign citizens could reveal important insights for developing pre- vention strategies.

Exploring the movement’s threat to law enforcement involved a collection of 94 instances in which sovereign citizens did harm police officers, attempted to harm them or threatened to do so. Violence aimed at police often began with routine traffic stops, where sovereigns were accused of violating basic traffic laws or had outstanding warrants. These stops were sometimes made worse by sovereigns fleeing the scene, thus escalating the situation. The findings of this research are consistent with other research indicating that most deadly far-right attacks on law enforcement are triggered by routine traffic stops (Gruenewald et al., 2016).

Sovereign citizen deadly violence against LEOs also occurred during ambushes. Though traffic stops are a large danger to LEOs, and often trigger sovereign citizen violence, the danger of an ambush is both real and deadly. The targeted attacks on LEOs, both those that were carried out successfully and those that were attempted but thwarted, highlight

the predatory capacity of the sovereign citizen movement.

5. Limitations and conclusion

Invariably, the descriptive nature of this analysis has limitations. The sample size, involving attacks and threats on LEOs, is too small to draw satisfactory conclusions. In addition, the data were collected from media-based reports, which are subject to errors and can lack completeness (Huff-Corzine et al., 2014). Without access to classified government data, media access, of this type, is often the only available information. Relatedly, despite a thorough and ongoing search, cases may have been missed. There may also have been cases that other re- searchers would have categorized differently. As mentioned above, some individuals were espousing sovereign citizen ideology but could have also been labeled as tax protestors or militias members, among others. Other researchers might have omitted those seemingly blended, crossover cases. For instance, Olajuwon David & Orlando Baldwin identified themselves as Moors but were simultaneously members of the New Black Panther Party.

This research took a conservative approach and only included cases where definitive sovereign ties were clear. An example of a case that was omitted was Martin Winters, leader of a doomsday survivalist group. Mr. Winters was arrested for illegally obtaining assault rifles and building bombs (Sullivan & Ryan, 2014). The FBI considered him an “extremely dangerous” individual who plotted to kill government agents, should they invade his property (Masferrer, 2014). One journalist labeled him a sovereign citizen but since his connection to the movement could not be independently verified, a decision was made to eliminate him from this sample of cases.

Table 2 Sovereign citizens who threatened to harm law enforcement.

Date State Name Circumstances

1. March 1998 Montana LeRoy Schweitzer Threatened federal officials 2. October 2007 New

Hampshire Ed Brown (and others) Threatened, on a number of occasions, to kill federal and local law enforcement officials

3. April 2010 Washington David Russell Myrland Threatened officers during traffic stop, that if he was arrested, he would come to the home of the arresting officer, arrest him and use deadly force if needed

4. March 2011 Arkansas Schaeffer Cox (and others) Plotted to kidnap, kill law enforcement and government officials, called it the “2-for-1” plan 5. February 2012 California Vahe Ohanion Entered Sheriff’s station with a large camera, claiming diplomatic immunity, stating that the police had “five

days’ notice to vacate.” After being escorted out, he said “I’m going to come back with a shotgun and snipe you.”

6. March 2013 Florida Paul James Szaraz Suspect with “enormous” amounts of weapons alarmed an acquaintance by talking about killing law enforcement officers

7. April 2013 Florida Jason Kozdra Suspect calls police and makes a death threat, repeats same threat upon their arriving at his home, says it is “his duty to kill government and police officers.”

8. May 2013 Louisiana Brandon Gibbs Made direct threat to any city employee; subsequently sent email to police warning them that “no trespassing would be tolerated” and to “stay away”

9. August 2013 Nevada David Brutsche & Devon Newman

Plotted to torture and kill police officers

10. August 2014 Missouri Olajuwon Ali Davis & Orlando Baldwin

Plotted to bomb public building, police vehicles and police

11. March 2015 Montana William Wolf Advocated a “shocking” level of violence towards law enforcement, and other public officials; had compared on webcast shooting police officers to shooting gophers; attempted to buy automatic shotgun allegedly to kill police

12. September 2015

West Virginia Thomas Deegan Threatened to overthrow West Virginia state government by targeting state capital, state police headquarters, Sheriff’s department, among others. Told followers “if the police arrive you should shoot them.”

13. January 2016 California Todd Sloan Had been posting Facebook threats against Sheriff’s office, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and federal government buildings; later searched his residence and found several homemade bombs, incendiary devices and booby traps

14. August 2016 Indiana Christopher Byrne After being arrested for having bomb making materials in his car, police found that he had the addresses of several law enforcement officers and the judge involved in a previous legal case against him

15. August 2017 Georgia Patricia Parsons Plotted to kidnap judges and sheriff 16. January 2018 Arizona Mitchell Taebell After being arrested for multiple offenses, included a high-speed police chase in which multiple people were

injured and stated during his arraignment hearing “officers can be killed under USC section 241 and 242. I just want to put that on record, and should be, in my opinion”; subsequently made similar comments at a personal press conference he held after his hearing

17. March 2018 Massachusetts Michael Hall Sent police private messages in which he said he had the “right to kill a cop who violates my constitutional rights when I am exercising them”

18. January 2019 North Carolina Joshua Brandon Sydes Threatened, on Facebook, to execute judge or law enforcement 19. January 2020 Louisiana Justin Higdon Threatened, on social media, to shoot police

C.M. Sarteschi

Aggression and Violent Behavior 60 (2021) 101509

10

Despite its drawbacks, a descriptive approach can be valuable, especially given the limited empirical information available concerning sovereign citizens. Even more limited is the information available to guide law enforcement agencies, who do interact directly with sovereign citizens, in the course of routine police work (Gruenewald et al., 2016; Smith, 2019). Given LEO’s regular contact with sovereign citizens, and the danger posed by sovereigns, the lack of mandated training programs, on this movement, is concerning (Smith, 2019). Some law enforcement agencies offer optional training. Such training should not be optional but instead mandatory and universal. Past training has likely saved the lives of many LEOs and could prevent future tragedies. Beyond training alone, additional measures are needed to combat the danger posed by the sovereign citizen movement. This danger is not limited to law enforce- ment but extends to public officials, and to society at large.

References

Baldino, D., & Lucas, K. (2019). Anti-government rage: Understanding, identifying and responding to the sovereign citizen movement in Australia. Journal of Policing, Intelligence and Counter Terrorism, 14(3), 245-264. doi: I: https://doi.org/10.108 0/18335330.2019.1663443.

Berger, J. M. (2016). Without prejudice: What sovereign citizens believe. Washington D.C.: George Washington University. Retrieved from https://cchs.gwu.edu/sites/cchs. gwu.edu/files/downloads/Occasional%20Paper_Berger.pdf.

Bever, L. (2017, November 14). Jared Fogle just tried to get out of his sex-crime sentence with a legal Hail Mary. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washington post.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/11/14/jared-fogle-just-tried-to-get-out-of-h is-sex-crime-sentence-with-a-legal-hail-mary/.

Carson, J. V., James, P. A., & O’Neal, T. A. (2019). The radicalization of the Kanes: Family as a primary group influence? Dynamics and Asymmetric Conflict, 12(1), 67–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1568513

Carter, D., Chermak, S., Carter, J., & Drew, J. (2014). Understanding law enforcement intelligence processes. Report to the Office of University Programs, Science and Technology Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. College Park, MD: University of Maryland START Center.

Challacombe, D. J., & Lucas, P. A. (2019). Postdicting violence with sovereign citizen actors: An exploratory test of the TRAP-18. Journal of Threat Assessment and Management, 6(1), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1037/tam0000105

CNN Wire Staff. (2010, September 10). Suspect sets fire to house, surrenders in Texas standoff, police say. CNN. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/09 /18/texas.standoff/index.html.

Delong, K., & Sanchick, M. (2018, March 8). 2 held after officer-involved shooting in western MN accused of sex trafficking in Milwaukee. Fox6Now. Retrieved from https://fo x6now.com/2018/03/08/2-held-after-officer-involved-shooting-in-western-mn-a ccused-of-sex-trafficking-in-milwaukee/.

Dew, S. (2016). “Moors know the law:” Sovereign legal discourse in Moorish science religious communities and the hermeneutics of supersession. Journal of Law and Religion, 31(1), 70–91. https://doi.org/10.1017/jlr.2016.3

Dewan, S., & Hubbell, J. (2010, May 23). Antigovernment rage for father and son in police shooting. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/ 24/us/24arkansas.html.

Etters, K. (2015, November 21). LCSO deputy’s ambush punctuated rough year. Tallahassee Democrat. Retrieved from https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/2015/11/20/ lcso-deputys-ambush-punctuated-rough-year/75969124/.

Evans, T. (2017, November 17). Judge boots ex-Subway spokesman Jared Fogle’s child sex case appeal. USA Today. Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/b usiness/2017/11/13/judge-boots-ex-subway-spokesman-jared-fogles-child-sex- case-appeal/860830001/.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2017). Black identity extremists likely motivated to target law enforcement officers. Washington, DC: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Counterterrorism Division.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (n.d.). Redemption/strawman/bond fraud. Retrieved from https://www.fbi.gov/scams-and-safety/common-fraud-schemes/redemption- strawman-bond-fraud.

Gauvey Herbert, D. (2020, May 29). The King of Germany will accept your bank deposits now. Bloomberg Businessweek. Retrieved from King of Germany https://www.bloom berg.com/news/features/2020-05-19/who-is-germany-s-self-proclaimed-king-peter- fitzek?utm_content=businessweek&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&cm pid=socialflow-twitter-businessweek&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic.

Gruenewald, J., Dooley, K. M. G., Suttomoeller, M. J., Chermak, S. M., & Freilich, J. D. (2016). A mixed-method analysis of fatal attacks on police by far-right extremists. Police Quarterly, 19(2), 216–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611115623061

Hautzinger, P. (2013). June 15, 2013 shooting incident investigated by the 21st Judicial District Critical Incident Team. Office of the District Attorney 21st Judicial District of Colorado. Retrieved from https://da.mesacounty.us/globalassets/district-attorney/c irt-letters/july-17-2013.pdf.

Hedley, K. (2020, June 5). Bizarre scenes in tiny WA town as ‘sovereign nation’ attempts to overthrow government. The Age. Retrieved from https://amp.theage.com.au/nationa l/bizarre-scenes-in-tiny-wa-town-as-sovereign-nation-attempts-to-overthrow-gover nment-20200605-p54zxx.html?__twitter_impression=true.

Hoffman, B., & Ware, J. (2020, July 21). The challenges of effective counterterrorism intelligence in the 2020s. Law Fare. Retrieved from https://www.lawfareblog.com/ch allenges-effective-counterterrorism-intelligence-2020s.

Huff-Corzine, L., McCutcheon, J. C., Corzine, J., Jarvis, J. P., Tetzlaff-Bemiller, M. J., Weller, M., & Landon, M. (2014). Shooting for accuracy: Comparing data sources on mass murder. Homicide Studies, 18, 105–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1088767913512205

Jensen, M., Yates, E., & Kane, S. (2020). Profiles of individual radicalization in the United States (PIRUS). College Park, MD: START. Retrieved from https://www.start.umd. edu/pubs/START_PIRUS_ResearchBrief_May2020.pdf.

Kalinowski, C., IV (2019). A legal response to the sovereign citizen movement. Montana Law Review, 80(2), 153–212. Retrieved from https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/cgi /viewcontent.cgi?article=2450&context=mlr.

Koay, A. (2019, May 4). “I am a Sovereign.” I am “we the people”: Rant by maskless S’porean woman in Shunfu, explained. Mothership. Retrieved from https://mothersh ip.sg/2020/05/sovereign/.

KPIX. (2013, March 21). Details emerge about man who shot CHP officer on I-680 near Alamo. San Francisco CBS. Retrieved from https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/ 03/21/details-emerge-about-man-who-shot-chp-officer-on-i-680-near-alamo/.

Labella, M. (2018, March 2). Man charged with sending police threatening messages. Eagle Tribune. https://www.eagletribune.com/news/haverhill/man-charged-with-send ing-police-threatening-messages/article_88230f1e-b319-5e96-8995-69d096dd21cf. html.

Loeser, C. E. (2015). From paper terrorists to cop killers: The sovereign citizen threat. North Carolina Law Review., 93(4), 1106–1139. Retrieved from http://scholarship.la w.unc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4744&context.

Luxmoore, M. (2019, March 25). Flouting the law in nostalgia’s name: Russia’s growing movement of “soviet citizens”. Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty. Retrieved from https ://www.rferl.org/a/flouting-law-in-nostalgia-s-name-russia-s-growing-movement-o f-soviet-citizens-/29962523.html.

Masferrer, M. R. (2014, June 18). FBI arrests “doomsday prepper”. Bradenton Herald. Retrieved from https://www.bradenton.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/brea king-news-blog/article34719855.html.

Meloy, J., & Gill, P. (2016). The lone-actor terrorist and the TRAP-18. Journal of Threat Assessment and Management., 3, 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1037/tam0000061

Moorish sovereign citizens. (n.d.). Southern Poverty Law Center. Retrieved from htt ps://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/Moorish-sovereign-cit izens.

Mustian, J. (2010, September 26). Anatomy of a standoff. Retrieved from. OA Online. https://www.oaoa.com/news/article_fe2303de-7fa3-5323-ab65-38f58fbddbaa. html.

NBC Washington. (2017, December 1). Moorish nationalist couple arrested again for trying to claim rights to a DC home: Police. Retrieved from https://www.nbcwashi ngton.com/news/local/Moorish-Nationalist-Couple-Arrested-Again-for-Trying-to-C laim-Rights-to-a-DC-Home-461184553.html.

Netolitzky, D. (2018). Organized pseudolegal commercial arguments [“OPCA”] as magic in ceremony. Alberta Law Review, 55(4). https://doi.org/10.29173/alr2485

New Jersey Office of Homeland Security and Preparedness. (2016). Overlap between black separatists and Moorish sovereign citizen extremists. Retrieved from http s://www.njhomelandsecurity.gov/analysis/overlap-between-black-separatists-an d-Moorish-sovereign-citizen-extremists.

Paradis, C. M., Owen, E., & McCullough, G. (2018). Evaluations of urban sovereign citizens’ competency to stand trial. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 46(2), 158–166. https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.003758-18

Parker, G. F. (2014). Competence to stand trial evaluations of sovereign citizens: A case series and primer of odd political and legal beliefs. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 42(3), 338–349. Retrieved from http://jaapl. org/content/42/3/338.

Parker, G. F. (2018). Sovereign citizens and competency to stand trial. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 46(2), 4. https://doi.org/10.29158/ JAAPL.003743-18

Pennsylvania v. Smith. (2020). 19-5753. United States District Court, Eastern District, Pennsylvania.

Phillips, J. K. (2016). Not all pro se litigants are created equally: Examining the need for the new pro se litigant classifications through the lends of the sovereign citizen movement. Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, 26(4), 1221+. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/geojlege 29&div=54&id=&page.

Pitcavage, M. (2012). The lawless ones: The resurgence of the sovereign citizen movement. Anti-Defamation League. Retrieved from https://www.adl.org/sites/default/files/d ocuments/assets/pdf/combating-hate/Lawless-Ones-2012-Edition-WEB-final.pdf.

Pohl, J. (2018, January 25). Phoenix-area police chase suspect claims ‘officers can be killed’. The Republic. Retrieved from https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/lo cal/tempe/2018/01/25/phoenix-police-chase-suspect mitchell-taebel-officers-can- killed-under-federal-law/1065622001/.

Powers, A. (2015, August 15). The Vegas plot. In In the world of right-wing extremism, how do you tell who is dangerous?. The California Sunday Magazine. Retrieved from https ://story.californiasunday.com/sovereign-citizens-vegas-plot.

Powers, A. (2019, March 29). How sovereign citizens helped swindle $1 billion from the government they disavow. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes. com/2019/03/29/business/sovereign-citizens-financial-crime.html.

Pytyck, J., & Chaimowitz, G. A. (2013). The Sovereign citizen movement and fitness to stand trial. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 12(2), 149–153. https:// doi.org/10.1080/14999013.2013.796329

C.M. Sarteschi

Aggression and Violent Behavior 60 (2021) 101509

11

Rahman, R., Meloy, J. R., & Bauer, R. (2019). Extreme overvalued belief and the legacy of Carl Wernicke. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 47 (2), 180–187. https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.003847-19

Rellahan, M. P. (2020, January 30). Immaculata student guilty in officer assault. Daily Local News. Retrieved from https://www.dailylocal.com/news/immaculata-student-guilty -in-officer-assault/article_dd1a8286-42f3-11ea-af4d-b32f8aeeba78.html.

Rossman, S., & Portman, J. (2014, December 15). 3 emergency dispatchers fired following deputy’s shooting. Tallahassee Democrat. Retrieved from https://www.tallahassee.co m/story/news/local/2014/12/05/3-emergency-dispatchers-fired/19947495/.

Sarteschi, C. M. (2020). A psychological and criminological analysis. Springer International Publishing.

Schouten, & Brennan, D. V. (2016). Targeted violence against law enforcement officers. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 34, 608–621. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2256

Sierra-Arévalo, M., & Nix, J. (2020). Gun victimization in the line of duty: Fatal and non- fatal firearm assaults on police officers in the United States, 2014–2019. Criminology & Public Policy. Retrieved from https://jnix.netlify.app/files/pdfs/cpp_gva_assaults. pdf?utm_source=The+Trace+mailing+list&utm_campaign=3411e08f24-EMAIL_ CAMPAIGN_2019_09_24_04_06_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ f76c3ff31c-3411e08f24-112434573 (in press).

Slater, S. B. (2016). Sovereign citizen movement: An empirical study on the rise in activity, explanations of growth, and policy prescriptions. Unpublished master’s thesis. Monterey, California: Naval Postgraduate School.

Smith, T. (2019, September 23). What you don’t know about sovereign citizens can hurt you. In Homeland security. Retrieved from https://inhomelandsecurity.com/what- you-dont-know-about-sovereign-citizens-can-hurt-you/.

Southern Poverty Law Center. (n.d.). Sovereign citizens movement. Retrieved from https ://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/sovereign-citizens-mo vement.

State of Minnesota v. Blanshan. (2017). 11-CR-15-539. State of Minnesota In Court of Appeals.

Sullivan, B. A., Freilich, J. D., & Chermak, S. M. (2019). An examination of the American far right’s anti-tax financial crimes. Criminal Justice Review, 44(4), 1–23. https://doi. org/10.1177/0734016819839772

Sullivan, D., & Ryan, P. (2014, June 19). Doomsday prepper Martin Winters surrenders, held without bail. Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved from https://www.tampabay. com/news/publicsafety/crime/fbi-arrests-doomsday-prepper-martin-winters /2184898/.

Swan, B. (2019, August 19). Post-9/11 intel center now going after domestic terror. The Daily Best. Retrieved from https://www.thedailybeast.com/national-counterterror ism-center-set-up-after-911-now-going-after-domestic-terrorism.

Tau, B. (2019, July 23). FBI abandons use of term ‘Black Identity Extremism’. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/fbi-abandons-use-of-t erms-black-identity-extremism-11563921355.

Tesi v. Texas. (2014). 20-12-00096-CR. Court of Appeals 297th District Court of Tarrant County.

The Sun. (2020, May 13). Apex court upholds former Mister Germany’s prison sentence. Retrieved from https://www.sunnewsonline.com/apex-court-upholds-former-mis ter-germanys-prison-sentence/.

Thompson, C. (2019, August 9). Money-making schemes that ensnare prisoners and their families. The Marshall Project. Retrieved from https://www.themarshallproject.or g/2019/08/09/money-making-schemes-that-ensnare-prisoners-and-their-families.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2014). Domestic violent extremists pose increased threat to government officials and law enforcement. Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security, Office of Intelligence and Analysis.

United States v. Kriemelmeyer. (2006). 07-CR-052-C-01. United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.

United States v. Rodvelt. (2018). 00202-CL. United States District Court for the District of Oregon.

Valley, J. (2013, August 22). Metro infiltrates sovereign citizens movement, uncovers plots to ‘snatch,’ execute officers. Las Vegas Sun. Retrieved from https://lasvegassun.com/n ews/2013/aug/22/metro-infiltrates-sovereign-citizen/.

Vanderlaan, J. (2012, December 14). White sentenced to life. OA Online. Retrieved from https://www.oaoa.com/news/crime_justice/courts/article_868f75ac-463 4-11e2-8d54-001a4bcf6878.html.

Venzer, T. (2019, February 22). ‘Free citizen’ with apparent pig-shaped, ‘f-the police’ explosive charged in Maplewood standoff. Twin Cities Pioneer Press. Retrieved from https://fox6now.com/2018/03/08/2-held-after-officer-involved-shooting-in-weste rn-mn-accused-of-sex-trafficking-in-milwaukee/.

Wilson, C. (2020, May 6). This couple are urging fellow anti-vaxxers to pay to have their name and address added to form letters. Buzzfeed News. Retrieved from https://www. buzzfeed.com/cameronwilson/anti-vaxxer-facebook-sovereign-citizen-form-letters? utm_source=dynamic&utm_campaign=bfsharetwitter.

C.M. Sarteschi