A Cross Burning Hoax: A Politically Charged Incident in Colorado Springs
Introduction to the Case
In a dramatic turn of events, Deanna West, one of three individuals charged in connection with a cross burning incident in Colorado Springs, pleaded guilty in federal court on Tuesday. The incident, which occurred in 2023, was allegedly staged to create the illusion of a racial attack on Yemi Mobolade, who later became the city’s first Black mayor. West admitted to conspiring to set the cross on fire and spread false information about the event, which prosecutors described as a deliberate hoax. In exchange for her guilty plea, prosecutors agreed to drop an additional charge related to the arson.
The Motive Behind the Hoax
According to the plea agreement, the cross burning was part of a broader scheme to influence the mayoral election. Mobolade was running against an opponent, and the conspirators aimed to create the perception that he was facing racial discrimination to discourage his candidacy. By staging the cross burning and sharing images and videos of it with media outlets and civic organizations, the group hoped to generate public outrage and sway the election in Mobolade’s favor. West, who was financially and personally dependent on one of the other co-conspirators, Derrick Bernard, admitted to participating in the scheme to gain favor with him.
The Role of Co-Conspirators and Legal Arguments
While West has accepted responsibility for her actions, the other two individuals charged in the case—Derrick Bernard and Ashley Blackcloud—are fighting the charges. Their lawyers argue that the cross burning was a form of political theater intended to help Mobolade win the election. They claim that the stunt, which took place in the middle of the night and was not witnessed by anyone outside the group, did not threaten anyone and therefore constitutes protected free speech under the First Amendment.
Communication Between Bernard and Mobolade
The indictment reveals that Derrick Bernard communicated with Mobolade before and after the cross burning. In a Facebook message sent about a week before the incident, Bernard wrote, “I’m mobilizing my squadron in defense and for the final push. Black ops style big brother. The klan cannot be allowed to run this city again.” The two also spoke on the phone for about five minutes three days after the cross was burned. However, Mobolade has consistently denied any knowledge of or involvement in the hoax, describing Bernard as merely a “local media personality” and emphasizing that he willingly cooperated with investigators.
Mobolade’s Response and Denial of Involvement
Mayor Mobolade has publicly distanced himself from the incident, stating that he had no warning or involvement in the cross burning. A spokesperson for the city referred to a video statement Mobolade posted on social media shortly after the indictments were announced. In the video, Mobolade expressed his willingness to assist investigators and shared a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice identifying him as a victim or potential victim in the case. Despite these denials, the communication between Bernard and Mobolade has raised questions about the extent to which the mayor may have been aware of the scheme.
Conclusion: Implications of the Hoax
The cross burning hoax has sparked intense debate about the line between political activism and criminal behavior. While some argue that the incident constitutes a dangerous act of deception, others see it as a form of political theater protected by free speech. The case highlights the complexities of navigating race, politics, and justice in modern America. As the legal proceedings unfold, the nation will be watching to see how the courts balance these competing interests and whether justice is served for all parties involved.
