Star Simpson, one year after Boston airport terror-scare: unedited BBtv interview transcript
September 21, 2008 marks exactly one year since the day on which 19-year-old MIT engineering student Star Simpson walked into Boston's Logan International Airport wearing a home-made light-up sweatshirt, and asked an airport worker for information about a friend's arriving flight.
Boston is the city from which two terrorists involved in the 9/11 attacks departed in 2001. They boarded planes at Logan and flew them into the World Trade Center Twin Towers in New York, destroying the buildings and killing nearly 3,000 people.
In January 2007, a false terrorism scare happened in Boston when a guerrilla marketing team working to promote Cartoon Network's Aqua Teen Hunger Force show placed LED signs around the city. Authorities mistook the colorfully lit boards for bombs.
Just eight months later, in a persisting environment of anxiety over terrorism, a Boston Logan Airport worker mistook Star Simpson's LED-adorned wearable tech garment for a suicide bomb. That airport worker phoned Boston police. A small misunderstanding over a hoodie quickly became a surreal debacle during which police said they came close to killing Ms. Simpson.
Last Friday, we aired an interview with Star Simpson -- her first public comments on the incident since that day -- in a ten-minute video feature on Boing Boing tv (here's the direct MP4 link).
Some viewers asked if we could publish a transcript of our entire 45-minute Skype video chat, and here it is. One year, countless court dates, and much media uproar later, Star's wry advice to other would-be wearable electronics makers? "Hide the batteries." Snip from the transcript:
XENI JARDIN: So what exactly happened? What was the moment that changed from you going to pick up your friend with this shirt and another device which you'll show us in a moment... when did everything switch.STAR SIMPSON: The woman who made the call surprised me. I was asking an information woman for, 'has the flight come in, can you tell me which baggage claim to be at...' and she looked at my jacket and glazed over completely in fear. And I was very surprised by that, I didn't know what to say. That was how everything started. I tried my best to explain everything to her, and I turned the lights off the jacket. Nothing calmed her down. No words could convey anything calming to her. I thought maybe I could at least get out of her sphere of terror, whatever was causing her such anxiety, by maybe going somewhere else and trying to find my friend on my own. Then, I didn't expect that things would go so badly from there. After that I was trying to leave the airport, I was catching the shuttle bus to go home because I realized that I'd missed my friend and the next best thing I could to was find a phone. I was waiting on the traffic island for the next shuttle bus to get on the subway when all of a sudden my hands were grabbed from behind me.
XENI: Who was grabbing your hands?
STAR: It turned out to be the state police. They have this magic trick where 40 of them can appear all at once out of nowhere. I didn't see them coming ever. Just, all of a sudden my hands were wrenched up over my head and my stuff was thrown on the ground, and they're everywhere, and some of them were holding really big devices that I realized were machine guns, later. I was -- I couldn't identify them at the time, I thought maybe they were camera tripods. I had no idea what was going on.
Full text of the interview follows after the jump.
XENI JARDIN: Welcome to Boing Boing tv, I'm Xeni Jardin and today we're going to speak with Star Simpson. I'm holding a stack of paper here, about 300 comments to a BB post dated September 21 2007. The title of that post is MIT student arrested for entering Boston airport with "fake bomb". And the short version is that it turned out not to be a fake bomb at all. It was a wearable tech jacket, a t-shirt with a breadboard and LED lights that light up, which led to a huge misunderstanding that changed this woman's life and changed a lot of how many of us feel about "maker culture" and airports, where those two things meet. Star, welcome to Boing Boing tv, and thanks very much for joining us today.
STAR SIMPSON: Thank you.
XENI: Star, what happened, tell me about that day, that incident -- what were you thinking when you wore that to the airport and when you crafted that. Did it ever occur to you that what happened could happen?
STAR: No not in the least, that did not ever occur to me. I made it thinking that I lived with some of the coolest, brightest circuit hackers in the world, and that wearable electronics were this cool thing I'd heard about since I was a kid, something that was part of the future and awesome. I wanted to make something where a bunch of people could collaborate on a cool circuit and I wanted to make clothes that involved electronics, because that's what I love. But that could change and evolve over time. Because sewing is tedious, and if you put a bunch of conductive thread on your clothes and you end up with something you don't like in a month... with a breadboard, though, you could just change it. I wore it to the airport because I was going to meet my friend Tim, who's taught me a whole lot about electronics. The thought that crossed my mind was "Oh, maybe Tim will like my project, it's kind of nerdy and cute, and that's the extent of what I thought. I wore the jacket mainly because it was a cold, grey day like this one, as you can see behind me. It was damp and cold outside that day in Boston. I had no idea what was going on when they arrested me. Pure terror.
XENI: So what exactly happened? What was the moment that changed from you going to pick up your friend with this shirt and another device which you'll show us in a moment... when did everything switch.
STAR: The woman who made the call surprised me. I was asking an information woman for, 'has the flight come in, can you tell me which baggage claim to be at...' and she looked at my jacket and glazed over completely in fear. And I was very surprised by that, I didn't know what to say. That was how everything started. I tried my best to explain everything to her, and I turned the lights off the jacket. Nothing calmed her down. No words could convey anything calming to her. I thought maybe I could at least get out of her sphere of terror, whatever was causing her such anxiety, by maybe going somewhere else and trying to find my friend on my own. Then, I didn't expect that things would go so badly from there. After that I was trying to leave the airport, I was catching the shuttle bus to go home because I realized that I'd missed my friend and the next best thing I could to was find a phone. I was waiting on the traffic island for the next shuttle bus to get on the subway when all of a sudden my hands were grabbed from behind me.
XENI: Who was grabbing your hands?
STAR: It turned out to be the state police. They have this magic trick where 40 of them can appear all at once out of nowhere. I didn't see them coming ever. Just, all of a sudden my hands were wrenched up over my head and my stuff was thrown on the ground, and they're everywhere, and some of them were holding really big devices that I realized were machine guns, later. I was -- I couldn't identify them at the time, I thought maybe they were camera tripods. I had no idea what was going on.
XENI: What happened then?
STAR: A lot. I had a bike lock clipped to my bag, and one of them asked me, 'Why would you bring a bike lock to the airport?' And they asked me about everything I had on me, my keys, anything, they asked each other if I had a lighter on me, I don't really understand why a lighter would be -- anybody's allowed to have a lighter on you, but not then, it would have helped with the argument that I had explosives on my person.
XENI: So you're being asked about things that were mundane parts of the stuff you carry around with you in your daily life in Boston, and what's going through your head now? You're realizing there are 40 armed guys, and the situation has taken on a different life, what's going through your head at that moment?
STAR: The sense that everything is going completely wrong. Trying to understand what is going on. Getting patted down and searched, take off your clothes, they asked me to take off the sweatshirt so they could look it over, looking through everything on me...
XENI: Were you wearing clothing underneath?
STAR: I was, I had a shirt on underneath.
XENI: You were also, if I remember from these reports, you were carrying around a piece of play-doh and playing with it, and people thought maybe it was C4 or some kind of explosive -- what was that?
STAR: Sure. That was this little hand-sculpted flower I brought to give my friend at the airport. (holds it up to camera, it's a bright pink rose, hardened clay)
XENI: Well did it look like that, or did it look like a wad of C4?
STAR: This is exactly what it was. It wasn't strapped to my chest, it was in my hand looking very much like a flower. It's hard (taps it against desk and against fingernails). It's not play-doh. (taps, audible) It's baked, hard. And this is exactly how it looked on that day, it hasn't changed shape or lost color or anything. They took it from me and kept it from me at the time. It's been about a year since I had this in my possession. But I chose not to show it to people until now.
XENI: Does it have a little inscription on there?
STAR: Yes, it says "For Tim" on the bottom. (holds up to camera, inscription visible). Tim is the name of my friend at the airport. I found out later that the Boston State Police use play-doh to train for recognizing [the explosive material] Semtex. It would have been very convenient had it been play-doh, but this is not play-doh, this is a flower.
XENI: So, Star, what happened there. You are taken in to custody. Are you able to contact your friend, your family, an attorney?
STAR: Things dived further into this spiral of surreality. We were probably on the airport island for what felt like a half an hour, 45 minutes. Once they had gone through all my stuff they took me to the Boston State airport police office, questioned me, took my fingerprint and mugshots, and then had me on a couch in some officer's office questioning me. At that point things were already blowing up outside. The phones were ringing off the hook in the police office. Somehow every news agency was all over it. The Secretary of Homeland Security called in wanting to know about the Boston Logan Suicide Bomber --
XENI: And that would be you.
STAR: Yeah, that would have been me. I wasn't anything like that, but within one hour, I still don't know what is going on, rumors are flying all the way to Washington DC, at least, how can -- I didn't know that was possible.
XENI: And Star, the first thing I might have done in that situation is called somebody on my cellphone, you didn't have a cellphone with you?
STAR: No, I didn't have a cellphone at that time. It ended up that reporters started calling my family and they called the police to try and contact me that way.
XENI: What happened then? You're realizing you've been mistaken for a suicide bomber.
STAR: I thought maybe I could explain, I don't know, the wheels had started rolling and no explanation made anything better, as you can tell. The next thing after that, they took me directly to court for a hearing.
XENI: Without being able to go home or speak to anyone, just directly from custody to court? Were you speaking to an attorney, to anybody?
STAR: No, nobody.
XENI: Did you ask to speak to an attorney?
STAR: When we were in court we started talking to attorneys. I've seen a lot of videos, like, from the ACLU, explaining how to properly talk to police, since then. I definitely wish I'd seen them beforehand.
XENI: What were some of the things you said to the police?
STAR: They asked things like -- so, my friend had a switch. He's converting his car to veggie oil. I had a switch that I was supposed to give back to him in my bag. And they held it up in front of my face and said WHAT IS THIS! WHAT IS THIS! Just, shouting and yelling, and being very confusing. I answered, "it's a switch..." what else, what else happened... they asked me, what was on my shirt. As soon as I could hand it to them, I did, the bomb squad guy was scrutinizing it and determined that it was a bunch of lights leading to a battery. They knew exactly what everything was before I was taken to the station.
XENI: Why do you think you were taken there and treated in such an aggressive manner, when some of the experts who were examining your things, if what you're saying is accurate, understood that these were not bombs. Why do you think that kind of approach persisted?
STAR: It's unfathomable to me. I've been completely bewildered by how far something like this can go. Boston appears to have some point to make. Some -- I don't know. It's like there's not a huge improvement in actual security, but there's a large step up in the amount of acting, and theater, happening. My understanding is that it's part of that.
XENI: So, you're taken to court, and this is the first time you speak to an attorney.
STAR: Actually, on the way to court, in the police car -- it was an unmarked car. The officers were discussing how it should be an unmarked car because they didn't want to bias the public, which was ridiculous, given the words they used later. Then in the police car, someone was listening to a talk show, and the talk show came on, and they were describing where I lived in the car, while I was on the way to court, already the radio is telling everybody where I live.
XENI: You're hearing this on the radio?
STAR: Yeah, I didn't even know exactly what was going on. And I'm hearing the facts that I'm supposed to believe about myself on the radio on the way to court.
XENI: By this time, have you spoken to anybody, your parents, friends, anyone?
STAR: Just Tim, the friend at the airport, who said, where can I meet you, tell me how to help.
XENI: So you arrive at court, what happens.
STAR: At court, this was another surreal thing -- I was taken to the back and was put in jail. They shackled my hands and ankles, and waited until the hearing with the judge, I was in the jail in the back for an hour.
XENI: So by this time how much time has passed since you first asked the airport information lady your question.
STAR: About 4 or 5 hours. Definitely enough time to start to make some better judgements.
XENI: So you're shackled, you're in jail, what happens then.
STAR: I'm in the court then, after that, with a court-appointed lawyer, making some basic statements, based on whatever information is available. That's -- at the time, that's when the media mob was all around me. There were a million cameras there. We tried to leave, they were chasing us through the courthouse, hounding the car...
XENI: I remember seeing video or snapshots on blogs of you and your friend Tim leaving the courthouse at some point.
STAR: More like fleeing the courthouse.
XENI: Where did you go? At what point did you stop being a shackled detainee, and return to being someone who could leave of her own free will?
STAR: At that point, we'd called a bunch of lawyers, the advice was to not talk to anybody. We left and I tried to figure out what had happened that day. I spent some time trying to get my mind around what had happened, is this really possible? Where do I live? What is this? What do I do? How big is this? I didn't realize my name and face were already being published internationally. No sense of the grandness of the media blowup.
XENI: I'm looking at a printout of the original Boing Boing post, September 21, 7:43AM. I was personally following this story all day. I think I made like, nine? Fifteen updates throughout the day. But we watched this story as it unfolded, I remember being on the other side of the monitor, as it were, thinking -- our hunch, sort of knowing who you probably were by 6 or less degrees of separation through the internet, maker culture and whatnot, we on Boing Boing kind of got it that unless we'd really misjudged you, you were not a suicidal terrorist. Our presumption that was a horrible misunderstanding had taken place here. You blacked out after that, vanished, we heard nothing from you. What happened then?
STAR: That day -- so, 7:43am for Boing Boing would have been noonish for me. I was just getting out of court. I tried contacting different lawyers. The lawyers for the Aqua Teen Hunger Force guys gave us advice. I think it was he who said don't talk to the press. That's why you didn't hear anything from me until now. I was in the middle of a pretty hectic term at MIT, my goal was to get a deep breath, figure out what had gone on, and put everything I could into -- okay, that was something that happened, and my focus was to finish MIT and I didn't believe that this court thing... because it was so clear to me, why I made this, I never expected that this case would last for an entire year. I didn't expect the postponements, delays, we can't dismiss this now because the media is paying too much attention. That just seemed totally, totally backwards, right? That should not be the focus of the justice system.
XENI: So eventually though, this did come to trial. That's September of last year, your first court hearing was months later?
STAR: There were many dates, they were mostly dates to postpone the hearing. Finally I had court date in June, 2008. My fourth D.A., the judge was retiring. My lawyers recommended that I make a deal with the D.A. and end the case, and after an entire year I was definitely very tired and also wanted to end everything also. So the deal made with the D.A. was to perform 50 hours of community service, to not be arrested in Massachusetts, for an entire year, and that I had to issue a public apology to Boston.
XENI: What were you accused of, and what was it decided that you'd done? Were you convicted of a crime?
STAR: I was not. The other part of the deal was that MA dropped the "hoax device" charge, finally, after a year.
XENI: Can you explain what that was?
STAR: A "hoax device" is defined as an "infernal machine," any device intended to cause anxiety or fear. I think I read a case where the last person charged with this actually had explosives and was using them to clear land on his own private property and didn't have anything to ignite the explosives. But I didn't have anything like that. Another key part of the charge is that you have to intend to cause fear, anxiety, and I did not have that intention. So after the many months, MA finally dropped the "hoax device" charge. They claimed I'd been a disorderly person instead, because you don't have to intend to be a disorderly person. You can charge anyone with that. And if I don't complete the community service, I would be charged with that. It's a totally fascinating thing. If you watch the press report on that day, Major Scott Pare says it's lucky I cooperated with the police because otherwise I would have ended up in the morgue instead of a cell.
XENI: Star, how do you feel when you hear that quote?
STAR: Terrified. Completely terrified. I was almost killed on that day. The police could kill me, and I would never have been able to ask what was going on. It's hard to believe they mean me.
XENI: Was the judgement fair? Are you angry about how things turned out?
STAR: It doesn't make any sense to me. I happened to wear the wrong shirt on the wrong day to the wrong place and all of a sudden, here's two years of dealing with this, and I should make an apology for the over-reaction of a bunch of other people who heard that I was doing something wrong and didn't make their decisions based on facts. Now I'm being punished for something they've admitted was not a charge they could pursue.
XENI: How have you been punished? How has the reaction to this incident changed your life?
STAR: I've become very turned off to living in Boston. I'm taking time off to travel, because that seems like a much better plan than continuing to live in that state. The reaction of people in Boston has been -- based on news reports containing any number of lies by the police, and little embellishments by writers, people have -- any number of reactions towards me. While biking one day, some complete stranger spit on me, spit on my bicycle, and shouted that I should have done time. I know he doesn't know anything about what actually happened.
XENI: Does that happen often, hostile reactions from people on the street?
STAR: Yeah. Every time I'd go out, I'd meet some person who had something to say, and had formed strong opinions and decided to take that opportunity to take them out on me.
XENI: So are you still an MIT student?
STAR: Yes, and I'll be returning at some point.
XENI: When?
STAR: I'm not sure. Maybe a year, maybe more.
XENI: I remember reading something you said, that you felt like MIT disowned you, is that correct?
STAR: Yeah, so not only did the Boston Herald and other papers slander me on the day, but MIT made a press statement on that same day, before even I know on, and when they definitely did not know what was going on -- doing the same thing. Making a public statement about what had happened. There were no facts available and they were making statements about what had happened, my own school.
XENI: What did they say, Star?
STAR: That my actions were reckless and cause for concern.
XENI: How did that make you feel?
STAR: I didn't know where to go, who to talk to. What I should do. I needed advice from someone. I'm trying to do well in school, here's my school telling the entire world what they think of me without any basis.
XENI: Who did you go to for advice and support?
STAR: Mostly the people I live with. The same creative people and engineers who'd inspired me to build the shirt in the first place. I ended up hiding from anywhere I used to go, for that first week after it happened. Any time I showed up at the machine shop I used to hang out at, there would be reporters outside. I didn't want any of that. I just wanted to be able to go to a place and figure everything out. I couldn't go back to my house that much. I did call my family -- they lived in Hawaii, so finding everything out was time-delayed. They provided support. Tim provided support. My friends provided support.
XENI: Did one of your friends give you the plans, the design for that shirt?
STAR: I designed everything myself.
XENI: What were the reactions of your friends and roommates?
STAR: When I first started working on it, it was like, oh you could put this on it, you could put that on it... then, when I got arrested, people didn't believe it. Didn't believe it was me. Everyone was completely shocked and didn't know what to say, do, or believe.
XENI: Star, how old are you now?
STAR: 20.
XENI: Do you feel like what happened with this incident has caused you to grow up faster?
STAR: The main thing I can say is that I believed that police were nice, friendly folks before last September. And my opinion has changed drastically in that respect.
XENI: Can you understand how maybe that first person who fingered you, the woman who was terrified by your shirt, can you feel empathy toward how that person might have been scared? How do you feel about that person's reaction?
STAR: It inspires me to try and help explain electronics even more. I can see how a common picture of electronics could lead to an unreasonable reaction that is very strong. Yes, I can understand why she was gripped with fear and called the police. The only thing I can think to do is continue to study electronics, and try to help other people to learn, and understand.
XENI: Star, we asked Boing Boing tv viewers and people who read our blog for comments. I'll ask Dana Devonshire, our series producer, if she'd read some of those out. Would you mind?
STAR: Sure, go ahead.
DANA: Twitter user "ehanesrn" asks Star, "How long did it take the 'U gotta be kidding' feeling to wear off after arrest?' Seriously."
STAR: I'm not sure that it has. It still seems surreal.
XENI: Was there a morning when you finally woke up -- I mean, I remember when 9/11 happened, I woke up the next day and I thought, that was a dream, but then something snapped and I realize, no, that was real. When did that happen for you after this?
STAR: Maybe after 5 or 6 court dates.
XENI: So basically, last week, huh.
STAR: The fact I can say it's over has a lot to do with saying it's a real thing that did happen and is over. While it was going on it just kept growing into something more nightmarish each time.
DANA: Here's another question. This is from @scott_so. He says, "Yeah, the TSA is ridiculous, but why instigate them?"
STAR: I never talked to the TSA. I was in baggage claim. I didn't pass any security checkpoints. One of my friends pointed out that if you are exercising your right to bear arms, you can have 11 pounds of ammunition on you at that point. I didn't meet any TSA people that day.
XENI: I'll paraphrase some of the 250-odd comments on that original Boing Boing post, too -- many people asked, "Cmon, what were you thinking? Who would wear something like that to the airport? I know what it was, but I'm not dumb." I'm sure you've heard that a million times. What do you say to those people?
STAR: I was thinking it was a cold day. It was a sweatshirt. If I'd seen my work through their eyes, no, it wouldn't have made any sense to wear it. But I didn't see it that way.
DANA: @witz wants to know if you still wear electrically powered clothing with lights after the Logan incident?
STAR: I have a lot more trepidation. I haven't worn that sweatshirt since, even though I got it back in June. Hasn't really been cold enough yet. I still like the idea. I still want to wear clothing that anybody can edit, and has cool circuits in it. I want to be a walking radio, I want to wear clothing with cool decorations.
DANA: Here's another question from Twitter. @biovert wants to know if your notoriety post-LED t-shirt has resulted in any job offers.
STAR: No.
XENI: Reality TV show offers?
STAR: No. A lot of my friends had offers to be on various talk shows, but I thank them for all being sane enough to know better.
DANA: @RobboMills asks, "Do you think they would have reacted differently if it had been a hat?"
STAR: Hm. That's a good idea. Maybe so. There actions seem pretty irrational to me, I can't make good guesses.
XENI: I'm going to throw out another question from the blog. One anonymous commenter says [http://boingboing.net/2007/09/21/mit-student-arrested.html#comment-23001],
"What she created is a crude version of a promotional products T-Shirt used by companies to advertise their products. These have been around for years. I have one with the Heineken logo on it which lights up, rotates the lights in different areas and plays different music depending on the settings. Inside the T-shirt is the battery compartment and all the wiring."
This is not the first time someone has worn clothing with electronics in it. There are blogs, conferences, books devoted to this subject. The fact that all of the wiring and the homemade-ness was evident seems to me like what caused the reaction here. What do you think?
STAR: It's true these things exist. I did my best and I did it quickly. I hadn't scrutinized the placement of the battery pack in other wearables. That probably does make some difference but I don't see why it should.
XENI: Context came up in many of these comments, people said, I don't see anything wrong with making devices like this but I would have considered the context and the security hysteria.... what is your response?
STAR: I didn't know until after I got arrested that Logan was quite so hyper about security. I learned afterwards. It makes sense to be considerate.
DANA: I just want to ask you, Star, do you regret having chosen to wear this sweatshirt that day? You chose to do this innocently enough, but do you regret this?
STAR: It's pushed me, fueled me to explore other projects. [Boing Boing tv] interviewed me about Fuzzy Logic, which came directly out of the fact that people view electronics as scary, and they could be presented differently. I don't think I would have not chosen to wear the sweatshirt. It's like Groundhog Day. Every single day I would have woken up and picked out this sweatshirt. It's that day, played over and over again.
XENI: How do you feel most misunderstood by the world? If there was one thing you could say to set your own story straight, what would that be?
STAR: The biggest misunderstanding was that I was trying to create havoc. It was an innocent action in nature. It goes back to the question about why I chose to wear the shirt that day. In light of having been arrested, it appears maybe I put a whole lot of thought into this, and where I was going, and how it would appear in that situation. But in my mind, I was going to pick up a friend, and I put on whatever shirt. It wasn't an action at all. There wasn't a ton of weight in consideration.
XENI: You're a year older and wiser. What would you say to someone else, maybe a younger person who's becoming fascinated by wearable computing and thinking of tinkering around with this?
STAR: Practically? Hide the batteries. Some people commented on how there were "exposed wires." But actually, before I went to the airport I taped down the wires so they wouldn't short. I'd encourage someone who is fascinated by wearable electronics to make them. I continue to encourage that.
XENI: Do you feel like that's tied in to what it is to be an American?
STAR: Yes. You have to learn by making. To be able to make your own stuff is -- I mean, since you ask me about being an American, my perception is that a lot of the country is built on the ability to make things. It's important. You can't just buy everything.
XENI: Star, is there anything else you'd like to say to our audience?
STAR: I hope in seeing this, they can understand better.
XENI: Star, you mentioned that part of the court decision is that you have to do community service, for 50 hours. And you have to do a public apology. Have you done those?
STAR: I've completed half of the community service. You can choose what you'll do for 25 hours of it, and I finished those. I taught at the South End Technology Center in Boston, where they teach about technology and electronics to just about anybody, mostly underprivileged kids. I did a summer program, and did another bit of it on the BioTour bus which travels the country to teach people about clean energy. The other 25 hours I'm required for some reason to serve community service specifically with veterans. I'm figuring out how to do that. The public apology was written by my lawyers and apologizes, essentially, for Boston's overreaction on that day.
XENI: Our segment producer Derek Bledsoe has another question -- why you chose to talk to Boing Boing, and why now. You haven't spoken publicly about any of this until today. Why with us?
STAR: I didn't speak about it at all on advice of my lawyers. It's been about a year, and I realized it's important to say my end of things, because that perspective doesn't exist. I chose Boing Boing because of all of the different news headlines I read, Boing Boing was the least speculative, and appeared to get most everything right, in terms of your guesses as to why I made it, and my not having intended to cause any havoc. Thanks for the good coverage. For the West Coast to get it more right than people locally, was pretty good.
XENI: And you're publishing the plans for this shirt on Instructables?
STAR: Yes, I'd intended to publish it at the time. I like sharing plans on how to make things, in a collaborative way with other people, so they can learn electronics and instant wearable clothing.
XENI: Star Simpson, thank you for joining us on Boing Boing tv.
STAR: Thank you, Xeni.
Related:
BBtv: Star Simpson's first interview on the Boston airport LED sweatshirt scare.
Update: Star Simpson says, "I would like to thank Dwyer & Collora, my lawyers. I wanted to, but forgot to mention it during the interview taping."
Xeni and BoingBoing, thank you for following up on this. I wondered what had happened to this poor girl.
Thanks for publishing the transcript, Xeni. No offense, but that Skype interview was pretty distracting and hard to watch. So this made it much easier to get a handle on how she feels and what she's thinking.
Comments calling her stupid and that she should have known better, et al, etc, in 3... 2... 1...
"keep your head down" "don't be a pain in the ass to the rest of us, by exercising your freedoms." And certainly... don't hold people accountable for their mistakes.
That's the american way.
Who's the airheaded flibbertigibbet in baggage claim who "glazed over with fear"? That's where the real trouble lies. Whatever happened to the ideals of personal courage and personal responsibility? Is Kung Fu only real in the movies? And cops in a pack? Lord. I still remember Kent State, and this poor kid is lucky not to have martyred in the cause of an innocence this world never did support. She joins Hypatia, Galileo, Giordano Bruno and Charles Darwin in the eye of a firestorm in the Western soul. What's our problem?
Ugh. The TSA needs to be abolished. A few quotes come to mind.
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Jst t b clr:
"STR: ws thnkng t ws cld dy. t ws swtshrt. f 'd sn my wrk thrgh thr ys, n, t wldn't hv md ny sns t wr t. Bt ddn't s t tht wy."
Thn:
"STR: Hm. Tht's gd d. Myb s. Thr ctns sm prtty rrtnl t m, cn't mk gd gsss."
S sh dmts t ws stpd t wr t, nd cn ndrstnd th kn jrk rctn t wrng t t n rprt, vn thgh sh ltr clls th ctns "rrtnl."
spps tht jst bcs sh sw t n hr wn ys s "rt" whl knwng fll wll tht t wsn't smrt thng t wr, w shld ll "fl fr hr."
Hw cn nyn b tht nv?
n smmry:
" knw fll wll tht wht m dng s gng t b msndrstd, bt myslf dn't s prblm, s 'm dng t nywy. Thn ftr ppl hv th rctn cn ttlly jstfy, 'll pndr fr sympthy nywy."
Gv.M..Brk
Yay Star!
I saw you walking across MIT's campus once last winter. I was about to stop and wish you well, but I thought you were probably getting too much of that as it was. Sorry to hear my fellow perambulists have been so quick to judge you! Please know that you're a sort of hero to some of us out here!
I can't understand why she didn't charge them with wrongful detainment. Pleading guilty to disorderly person charges is the only stupid thing she did, IMO. If Greater Boston lets this happen, then they deserve to live in a police state.
Sh's stpd nd shdlv knwn bttr.
@Chris Tucker: I'm sure there will be. For a smart person, she should have had the sense not to wear that sort of thing in an airport, no matter how obviously harmeless it might be to you and I, given how freaking sensitive so many people are these days (especialy at an airport). I'd much rather live in a saner world where people don't freak out like that, but we don't.
HOWEVER...
Absolutly nothing excuses the way she was treated.
The only person who has an excuse for over-reacting is the woman at the desk. I wouldn't expect someone in that kind of job to have the faintest idea what she was looking at. Let's face it, the only bombs most people have seen are on TV and in movies, and they are rarely acurate.
Everyone else, the cops, the DAs, the bombsquad etc should have just gone "doh, all a miss-understanding" and let her go with a friendly bit of advice about what not to wear in airports. This should have stopped the moment the cops took her sweatshirt from her and it became obvious that it was harmelss.
For some reason police, both in the US and the UK, seem to have lost the ability to make common-sense judgments, or just admit when they got something a bit wrong. Witness the shooting of the Brazillian guy on the London Underground: noone has actually taken responsibility, and the Met Police insist on claiming that it was all just a terrible accident (while implying that he was in some way to blame). The same goes for that ad campaign in Boston. Rather than just admit that it was a mistake and ask people not to put things like that up, they go on the offensive and start trying to prosecute anyone involved.
The most serious crime these days seems to be making a fool of the police.
Paul
Engine Here, she had every inalienable right to do so. And you should be proud to live in a country where those rights are the foundation of our very existence.
Guysmiley, just a quibble, but the TSA didn't have anything to do with this. She never tried to enter any of the security areas of the airport. Otherwise, I agree with your sentiment.
Engine Here - "...(she) can understand the knee jerk reaction to wearing it to an airport, even though she later calls the actions "irrational."
So since when is a "knee-jerk" reaction necessarily rational?
Fantastic interview Xeni!
Reading this part:
"I believed that police were nice, friendly folks before last September. And my opinion has changed drastically in that respect."
made me start to choke up a bit. Any government which has to contemplate the best ways to kill its citizens has already failed.
Getting arrested for wearing a bunch of blinking lights...
Indeed, America is the 'Land of the free, home of the BRAVE!'
@ Engine Here
So she admits it was stupid to wear it, and can understand the knee jerk reaction to wearing it to an airport, even though she later calls the actions "irrational."
Don't misinterpret and pick totally different parts of the text:
Statement one: She admits to understanding that the stupid, untrained airport broad might have not known what LED's and double-A batteries (or whatnot) are.
Statement two: What she deemed irrational was to be dragged to jail and to court by dozens of armed officers.
What she says is that it would have been fair for a single, ignorant low-ranker airport staff to misidentify her equipment/actions but NOT for several law officers and the 'justice' system to push this as far as they did.
@11
Y ls hv n nlbl rght t yll "Fr!" n crwdd thtr. Dsn't mn y shld.
@12
Y'r rght, t ws pr chc f wrds wth kn-jrk; 'll grnt y tht.
Hwvr, sn't smthng rrtnl nhrntly smthng y cn't ndrstnd nd cnnt b jstfd? Sh gs t MT, sh shld b fmlr wth th cncpt.
Should Star have known better? Perhaps. But who should have known one better is the airport authorities and the Boston police.
As I said after the Aqua-Teen marketing fiasco, authorities that do not know the difference between a bomb and a blinking LED artwork should not cover their ignorance and ineptitude by persecuting innocent citizens.
The only reason the Boston legal system has pressed through with these inarguably trumped-up charges of "hoax device" or "disorderly person" (shades of authoritarianism there) is to try and use fear to control Star. They hope that if they keep someone young and spirited rattled enough, that it will prevent that person from pursuing real justice for herself.
It is a sick perversion of how society should function. The Boston police need to be sent back to college for a few years.
@engine here
You actually don't have a right to yell fire in a crowded theatre as it infringes on others rights.
But that's a subtlety and somewhat open to subjective opinion.
However to address your sentiment I think it's best to go with this analogy...
How is it for the Massachusetts's State Police to scream bomb in a crowded airport when there is no such thing. Or to point a gun at an innocent kid for no reason? Or in their own words... "she's lucky to be alive".
The offenders here are so very obviously the MA Police and the oversight they never had to reckon with.
Kids will be kids, artists will push the boundaries of social norm. And you know what... that's perfectly normal. Kids should be allowed to express themselves... and showing an interest in science, be it electronic design, or chemistry shouldn't subject you to harassment for any reason. It hurts our nation as a whole. And it's a violation of a persons basic inalienable rights without valid cause.
That's just the plain simple facts of the situation. The MA Police are entirely 100% in the wrong. And they should be held accountable.
I find it interesting that everytime this comes up, there are comments that amount to, "The way she was dressed, she had it coming!"
It's basically saying if you're weird, or different, or do something that people might not understand, keep your head down because you're likely to get in trouble.
I don't give anyone who misunderstood the shirt any leeway whatsoever. The woman who first raised the alarm could have easily asked her what it was. How hard would it have been to ask some basic questions before raising an alert?
By assuming people are panicky idiots that need to be avoided or appeased rather than educated, we give them permission to keep on being idiots.
Star: Our culture is crazy; you are sane. Some people spit on you, but a lot of people think it's completely unfair that this is how it went down. Sorry you had to go through all this. All you did was wear a sweatshirt with a cool toy on it. Boston should apologize to you.
I hope you use a lot of your community service time telling your side of the story.
America was founded by disorderly people.
I hope some enterprising lawyer takes this case on for a big fat [bill murray voice here] "And I'll sue your ass for wrongful prosecution" suit. A+ Harvard lawyers motivated by a big settlement usually cream C+ City College lawyers working for the city.
TSA is dum.
Or: Electronics are dangerous. So are chemicals. And computers. We should ban them.
(Please pick one.)
TSA wasn't responsible here, this was Boston PD. Star never interacted with TSA at the airport that day.
The appalling thing here isn't so much the initial police over-reaction, that's gonna happen if you have ramped up security (theatre). What is appalling is the subsequent refusal to back down and to keep on dragging the stupid thing through court. Why oh why couldn't they just have checked her out, found her harmless, and at most given her a bit of a warning about wearing odd things in airports?
Why oh why are the authorities so scared of admitting that they might have made a mistake? Do they think the faith of the public will come crashing down and there will be anarchy in the streets?
I make mistakes all the time. I admit it, and apologize, and don't drag it out for years and years and force innocent people to apologize to me.
You also have an inalieable right to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.
No, you don't.
Oliver Wendell Holmes said that the 1st would not protect somebody for *falsely* yelling "Fire!" in a theater. Or, to put it in modern terms, the 1st would not protect somebody for *falsely* yelling "OMGSUICIDEBOMBSWEATSHIRT!" in an airport.
Has anyone seen the text of this "apology" she had to issue to Boston? I suppose it's just gathering dust in the press release inbox of a few indifferent media outlets. I kinda hope it just says "Dear Boston, I'm sorry you're so retahded".
Anyway, glad to hear this story finally had an almost-happy ending.
Notice how even after they've terrified and arrested this young woman for no reason, there was no one in the Boston PD who had the basic common sense, decency or courage to say "OK, we're done here. Miss, go home and don't bring strange gizmos to airports in future. The rest of you, in my office now." The whole affair could have ended on the traffic island. Instead, they have to take it all the way to trial and when they can't get a conviction on the 'hoax device' charge, they use the "We can always get you for this" charge of "disorderly conduct".
It could be that doing the sane thing and recognizing that they had overreacted would have exposed them to liability, so that someone cynically decided that making a bullshit charge stick would be the cheapest way out. It could be that in our brave new national era of paranoia, unintentionally frightening hysterical people who watch too much television is already an offense. But either way, if you want to fix a broken system, those might be good starting points.
Well why doesn't she sell these shirts online? Hell, I'll bet she can sell the flower thing on Ebay. Turn this around, the worldwide marketing has already been done for her. Sell light-up shirts, make them look like bigger assholes by showing the world what her art is and let everyone wear one.
Original Post: http://www.boingboing.net/2007/09/21/mit-student-arrested.html
>"Thnk 'll wndr dwn t th mjr mtrpltn lwys-n-hgh-lrt-swrmng-wth-scrty rprt tdy wrng my fvrt swtshrt-y knw, th n wth th rd flrs gld t t. Shldn't b prblm-t's rt!"
*Flsh nd nv brdrng n stpdty
r
*Rctn ws lttl mr thn sh'd hpd fr
Y b th jdg....
""The Boston police need to be sent back to college for a few years.""
HAHAHAHA!!!! You're making the mistake of assuming these clowns ever went beyond the 10th grade. College? That's for them fancy-shmancy "elite" types...
This all makes me sick to my stomach, particularly the "blame the victim" mentality of some of the comments.
Any claims that she somehow deserved this shitstorm strike me as cowardly and petty.
It's sick that the whole thing dragged on for a year when it should have been clear there was no malice more or less immediately they calmed down and talked to her.
I don't blame the police for detaining her. They're a bunch of blockheads who would have been criminals if they didn't graduate from high school. What blows me away is the lust with which the state pursured this girl.
She didn't try to pass security, she was leaving the area when she was arrested, the experts knew that her devices were totally begnin. The whole thing was a witch hunt so "the people protecting us" could prove that they were tough on terrorism.
It's a microcosim of what happened after 9/11. Panic, fear then the someone with an impressive job title has their own agenda, ignores the truth and goes on the attack with trumped up claims. And you know what... they got away with it AGAIN!
People equate this with yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. I don't see it that way. To me, it's more like saying "I think that guy should be fired!" in a crowded theater, and then having someone in the next row misinterpret your statement and start telling everyone that you said that there was a fire, thus causing a panic. Should you be prosecuted for something like that? When the judge asks you why you yelled "Fire!" and you provide evidence that you didn't say that, should you be punished anyway?
I don't understand why people think this girl is at fault. Is there some sort of "No blinking lights" law that I'm not aware of? Are terrorists now wearing flashing diodes on their clothing to show their concealed weapons? Are we all now going to be held accountable for the rash assumptions of others?
"...and showing an interest in science, be it electronic design, or chemistry shouldn't subject you to harassment for any reason. It hurts our nation as a whole. And it's a violation of a persons basic inalienable rights without valid cause."
It's funny you should point that out. The DOJ's anittrust case against Microsoft frequently garnered criticism from the right in the format of: "How can the USA intellectually cannibalize itself by attacking its best and brightest?"
Star Simpson is one of America's best and brightest, showing an interest in science and technology. By attacking that, and by coddling the fearful and ignorant, America's society is intellectually cannibalizing itself.
We're only 50 years away from: "He shirt is blinking! She's a witch!"
dn't thnk nyn s rgng tht th trprs wr vrzls n thr "prst f jstc," bt r w mssng th fct tht n n s t blm bt hr, fr dng smthng sh knw ws stpd.
nd pls, pls, pls stp mkng hr mrtyr.
"Thy jst rrstd hr bcs sh's dffrnt!"
"Sh's mssndrstd!!!"
"Sh ws xprssng hrslf nd ws lbld XYZ!!!"
"W lv n plc stt!!!"
ngh.
wld b wrrd f sh >wsn't t th vry lst tkn n fr qstnng fr rnnng rnd n rprt wth wht lks lk bmb tpd t hr chst.
"I would be worried if she wasn't at the very least taken in for questioning for running around an airport with what looks like a bomb taped to her chest."
How does it look like a bomb?
How did the ATHF LED ads look like bombs?
Perhaps your IPOD looks like a bomb?
Maybe the average dimwit can be blamed for not being able to distinguish the difference between a bomb and what is essentially a TOY, but for trained law enforcement officers, there is no excuse.
Police should have realized the mistake and defused the situation immediately; apart from everything Star did, that was THEIR responsibility, and they failed.
@36–Maybe we could stop making her a martyr if you agree to stop making her a straw man, ENGINE HERE.
And how did she have "what looks like a bomb taped to her chest?" We should all be so lucky that suicide bombers start wearing bombs on the outside of their clothing. Powered by tiny batteries. Advertised with LEDs.
#32: "This all makes me sick to my stomach, particularly the "blame the victim" mentality of some of the comments."
h cm n... Sh s *nt* vctm. Sh chs t wr smthng tht ws crtn t prvk rspns frm scrty prsnnl. Ws s n vr-rctn? Dpnds n wh y sk. Th nly thng sh s vctm f s xtrmly pr jdgmnt.
I think it's time to get copper tube sewn onto a green T-shirt with curly wires tracing the different letters together.
"ceci ne pas une pipe-bomb"
@ 36--Just because she probably should not have worn the shirt to the airport does not mean that "no one is to blame but her". The cops should have recognized that she was not a threat fairly easily, and given her at most a stern warning. The fact that they instead dragged the whole process out is inexcusable. There were at least two unwise decisions here, and Star's is by far the smaller one.
@engine here
Here in the United States, we accept the differences in others. Be it skin color, religious, or even their choice in attire. We consider it a strength.
Your prejudice is not tolerated here. And your ignorance is not welcome. Please think long and hard about that. Your freedoms are granted only so far as they do not deny another theirs. And right now, you are advocating against the basic inalienable rights of a fellow citizen based on your own self righteous prejudice.
Regardless of the "environment" or "heightened circumstances", we live in a country of laws. Laws that protect all of us. When we give up on abiding by those laws... we lose that protection.
I for one don't want to lose my rights to pursue my dreams. I don't want to lose my right to live free, in a country of laws. I like this country the way it was.
I wish you and people in agreement with you would stop trying so hard to destroy the united states. Please, consider if you will what America stands for. And how you are utterly opposed to it.
"The only thing she is guilty of is somewhat poor judgement."
I fixed it for you.
On thing I find rather odd... If the police honestly believed she had a suicide bomb on her, isn't running up and grabbing her hands sort of insane?
That said, Boston's judicial system has pretty much established itself as being run by idiots.
ANGRYHIPPO–Did she deserve two years of legal battles, then? Did she deserve to have her life wrecked by this? For some flashing lights?
I don't think she deserved anything, though I also don't think she should have been surprised, in hindsight, that her actions provoked reactions. Someone who jogs alone, at night, through a really bad part of town, shouldn't be surprised if the night ends badly. But that person doesn't deserve the bad consequences, and that person is clearly still a victim.
The police at Logan started by doing their duty. Their duty also should have led them to diffuse the situation quickly. It should have been over in two hours, not two years.
Sh shld b pnchd n th fc fr dng smthng s stpd.
The lawyerly advice not to talk to the press is dumb in cases like this. Lawyers think that all significant facets of the case will be solved in a court of law and don't want complications arising from public statements. But a case like this is driven in large part by the court of public opinion. A good pr professional would have had a press conference the first day and made the police look justified in their concern but ridiculous in their continued overreaction. The sympathy generated would have made this case much shorter. As it was, public opinion made it impossible for anyone in authority to say the emperor has no clothes.
TETSUJIN2045, sock it to you for a comment so stupid.
Yeah, who gave Chicken Little a job at the Logan information desk?
People who are afraid of 'the public' should not work with them.
I stand by my earlier opinion, for what it's worth, that the "blame the victim" comments are cowardly. It's the ages-old attempt to insulate oneself from another's misfortune:
-Star was stupid, and I am not, as evidenced by my armchair condemnation of her. Therefore this sort of thing could never happen to me.
–If I blame it all on her, then I don't have to face the fact that our justice system, sometimes, gets out of control. That it hunts witches.
The baggage person was an idiot (or at least has a seriously diminished deductive faculty). Seriously, how many terrorists wear a 'bomb' on their 'shirt' while politely asking for directions? Isn't concealment the norm? It's practically a Monty Python sketch.
Sadly, I must have missed the media coverage for this story a year ago since this is my first time hearing about it. Although I do remember hearing about the Aqua Teens "bomb scare." I wonder how long it'll take for America to get back to not suspecting everyone slightly different of being a terrorist--or if we can ever get there. I think it is a flaw in the law enforcement/justice system that she actually had to plead out instead of having the case simply thrown out of court by a judge, but at least she didn't go to jail for something so innocuous.
@ENGINE HERE #36:
I would be worried if she wasn't at the very least taken in for questioning for running around an airport with what looks like a bomb taped to her chest.
Yeah but she wasn't just taken in for questioning. Questioning followed by release with an informative lecture about the likely consequence of wearing handmade electronics to the airport would have been an *appropriate* response, as other here have asserted. Instead, she was subjected to a lot more than that, over an extended period of time, in a way that had to have made her wonder at times whether she was being cast out by an entire nation, all for the crime of (as she saw it) going to pick up a friend at an airport. That's nuts.
@ANONYMOUS #28:
Well why doesn't she sell these shirts online? Hell, I'll bet she can sell the flower thing on Ebay. Turn this around, the worldwide marketing has already been done for her. Sell light-up shirts, make them look like bigger assholes by showing the world what her art is and let everyone wear one.
Awesome idea! Although I'd vote for the screen-printed non-electronic version. Text: "Creativity is Not a Crime". I'd buy one! XL, Haynes Beefy-T in hoody-colored dark gray, and please don't skimp on the sleeves.
#45- I agree with you that it should have been handled in a conversation with the PD, possibly expecting a disturbing the peace fine. The following legal troubles? No. But at what level is she responsible for her extremely (yes, Geekman, extremely) poor judgment? thnk ths s n xmpl f n ndvdl dt rnnng nt n dt brcrcy. Nthng smrt cms t f t. f t ws t prvk rspns, gl chvd. f t ws t mk sttmnt gnst scrty thtr, b prprd fr t t g hrrbly sdwys. f sh hnstly hd n d tht t cld nd ths wy, wll, nvty sn't lwys vrt gss...
"Oh come on... She is *not* a victim. She chose to wear something that was certain to provoke a response from security personnel. "
And yet, strangely, it didn't provoke a response by them until some dimwitted ticket agent freaked out.
Anybody know *her* name, BTW?
Would I have worn that in the airport?
Absolutely not.
But I am terrified of the average person, who is at best a dangerous and unpredictable animal. I wouldn't give them a shred of credit for recognizing the difference between a piece of tin foil and a bomb.
That being said, the rest of the world does not owe the pureeing of reality into baby food for the average troglodyte. I'm a psych major and I instantly recognized it as some wires on a breadboard. The problem is that people sit in front of their idiot-box all day absorbing fanciful programming without having a way to differentiate what they see from reality. Like many have pointed out, it would be extremely kind of terrorists to advertise bombs with LEDs on their shirts.
The police will rarely admit their mistakes, and I am not surprised that it has dragged on this long. They could have handled this much better, but again, would you expect them to?
I think it's important to reiterate that Star was NOT at the airport to board a plane, or even to enter the terminal. She was simply there to meet a friend.
@Mtt Jyc
Thnks fr smltnsly sggstng tht "dny" thr ppl's frdms whl sggstng crtl my frdm f spch. Yr hypcrsy ws dlly ntd.
Thnk y fr ls ncntng thr rc nd rlgn r nvlvd n ths n ny wy shp r frm. 'm nt ntrly sr whr tht cm frm, bt thnks fr th nfndd ssmptn tht m bgt f ny knd.
STR: "... cn s hw cmmn pctr f lctrncs cld ld t n nrsnbl rctn tht s vry strng. Ys, cn ndrstnd why sh ws grppd wth fr nd clld th plc..."
STR: " ws thnkng t ws cld dy. t ws swtshrt. f 'd sn my wrk thrgh thr ys, n, t wldn't hv md ny sns t wr t. Bt ddn't s t tht wy."
Ws sh mstrtd by th plc? Wtht qstn. Dd sh brng ths pn hrslf? thnk ts bvs tht sh knw t ws gng t prvk rctn, nd n xtrmly nccptbl n t tht.
N n s dnyng nyn's drms, n n s spllng ht spch. f sh dmttd sh ws lkng t prvk rctn, thn thy wld hv hd rsn t fllw p n hx dvc chrgs, s t mks prfct sns fr hr t b nv bt th rctn sh ws gng t prvk, bcs thy >wld b kn t yllng FR n thtr.
#54–Doesn't sound like we're that far apart, then, HIPPO. Maybe we only disagree about her level of naiveté. I think it's pretty easy, when you're immersed in a culture, be it an electronics maker-type culture or almost any other, to lose sight of how you and your interests appear to outsiders. I would accuse Star of "extremely" poor judgment if she had been trying to get past security, though in my wife's travels as a telescope-building astrophysicist she's carried far more dangerous-looking things than this hoodie on a plane, with no trouble. Why did my wife have no trouble? Is it because she's blond-haired and blue-eyed? Is it because she didn't go through Logan? I have no idea.
I'm always amazed at how many people pull out the "fire in a crowded theatre" line with no apparent awareness of its context.
The context was Schenck v United States, a Supreme Court case involving free speech in wartime. Charles Schenck published and distributed anti-draft leaflets during WW1. The Court unanimously held that the First Amendment did not protect Scheck's right to do this.
When Holmes wrote that "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic", he was actually saying that a person does not have the right to speak freely in wartime if the government decides that his speech is inconvenient.
She absolutely had this coming. Who the hell did she think she was to stand apart from the crowd? How did she possibly think she had the right to wear whatever LED-adorned clothing she wanted? She should have foreseen how stupid most people are and dressed accordingly.
But seriously, she shouldn't have agreed to any plea-bargain. The police and judiciary overreacted and continued even when they knew they were wrong. It's about them saving face without having to admit their over-reaction (especially after it was determined there was no bomb). I join Star - I once thought police were friendly and just wanted to help. Constant recent news events including this and the abhorrent Minneapolis crackdown are proof otherwise. Is it any wonder the police in this country are trying to crackdown on the lawful videotaping of their activities?
@engine here #57:
I think its obvious that she knew it was going to provoke a reaction, and an extremely unacceptable one at that.
Why do you think that?
To me, it seems like she's talking in retrospect, based on what she knows now.
Maybe I missed it (only read the transcript, didn't watch the video) but it seems like at the time she just had in mind wearing a sweatshirt on a coldish day.