Since Rittenhouse was found not guilty on all charges against him on Friday, GoFundMe will allow any future fundraisers started to raise money for his legal fees.
I wonder as to the reason why those accused of violent crimes are not allowed to fundraise. My guess is they are concerned some people might commit violent crimes just for the money. They could get a cheap lawyer or even plead guilty, spend a few years in prison then have hundreds of thousands of dollars waiting for them when they get out.
Are there any other hypotheses? Or does anyone know for certain?
I’d assume it falls under the Son of Sam laws, at least while the outcome is undetermined:
Reasonable assumption. But the Son of Sam law was ruled unconstitutional (8-0). And after rewriting the law to comply with the ruling it doesn’t appear to be a restriction on receiving defense money funds.
And there was successful fundraising for his defense. If it were illegal, those fundraising efforts were not prosecuted.
Fundraising is pure free speech. As no one is using coercion to obtain the money.
Even if someone committed a criminal act. You can’t criminalize my act of giving them a gift.
If asking and obtaining money for a criminal was illegal. Every politician would be in jail right now. Except maybe that guy that won in New Jersey last month.
Gofundme are just playing gate keeper.
Last I checked, they still had fundraisers up for the animal that mowed down children in Waukesha
Those rules are mostly just enforced against conservatives.
Blamtifa thugs almost never get in trouble for it.
Street thugs are bad enough but leftist coup plotters are far worse. Couple of fired FBI officials have accounts of about $500k.
Your hypothesis makes sense if you start from the assumption that the creators of the policy are honest and unbiased. But from years of record, that assumption is untenable. Which leaves the replacement hypothesis, that the policy is intended to defund conservatives.