Jacob Graham, a 20-year-old college student from Liverpool, has been sentenced to 13 years in prison for writing a “how-to” terror guide on weapons and bombs dedicated to “misfits” and “social nobodies”. Graham, who used the name “Destro the Destroyer”, idolized US terrorist Theodore Kaczynski – the “Unabomber”, and spoke of feeling wronged by his college and going on a “rampage”. He was found guilty of preparing terrorist acts, possessing information for terrorist purposes, and disseminating a terrorist publication.
Prosecutors alleged that Graham, although not about to commit a terrorist act himself, assisted other extremists he communicated with online. His motivation stemmed from a hatred and contempt for the Government, whom he perceived as tyrannical and oppressive towards “working class” people. Graham had above average intelligence and saw himself as a leader. He acquired instructions to construct bombs, firearms, and ammunition, and carried out chemical experiments. Police found chemicals, a 3D printer capable of printing parts of homemade firearms, and an “online arsenal” of information on his devices.
Despite claims that his activities were just “escapism and fantasy”, Graham was described by the judge as a dangerous offender. He searched the internet for information on making explosives, weapons, and ammunition, and portrayed himself as a knowledgeable and experienced terrorist. The judge noted that Graham posed a significant risk to the public of committing serious terrorist offences. His defense cited the impact of lockdown and his young age when he offended as factors to consider during sentencing.
During the trial, the prosecution revealed that Graham wrote a guide titled the Freedom Encyclopaedia, dedicated to individuals who want to fight for freedom against the Government. The guide detailed how to make weapons, explosives, fuses, pipe bombs, gunpowder, nail and car bombs. Graham’s probation report concluded that he had above average intelligence and saw himself as a leader. His defense emphasized that there was no clear ideological, political, or religious motivation behind his terror offences.
Jacob Graham showed no reaction as he was sentenced to 13 years in prison with a five-year extended license. He must also notify the police of his whereabouts for 30 years. After being arrested in May 2022, police found chemicals, a 3D printer, and an “online arsenal” of information on his computer devices. Despite Graham’s claims that his activities were just a “strange hobby,” the judge determined him to be a dangerous offender with a significant risk of committing serious, specified terrorist offences.
Join Our Newsletter
Get the latest crime news and updates directly to your inbox. [newsletter]
19 Comments
Should distributing information be punished this harshly? Seems excessive, thoughts?
This punishment seems excessive. Shouldnt intent and impact be considered?
Intent and impact are irrelevant when it comes to enforcing consequences for unacceptable behavior. The severity of the punishment should serve as a deterrent for future misconduct. Accountability is key, regardless of intentions.
I cant believe the sentence length! Isnt that too extreme?
This punishment seems excessive. Shouldnt the focus be on rehabilitation instead of harsh sentencing?
This punishment seems harsh, should rehabilitation be prioritized over punishment?
Do you think the punishment was too harsh or deserved? Lets discuss!
This sentence seems excessive, considering the intent behind the distribution.
Is distributing information a crime or free speech? Lets discuss!
Distributing information is not a crime but context matters. It can be free speech or illegal depending on the content and intent. Lets not oversimplify a complex issue. Lets have a nuanced discussion instead of jumping to extreme conclusions.
Wow, do you think the punishment fits the crime? Seems harsh to me.
This sentence seems excessive. Shouldnt intent and context be considered too?
I believe the sentence is too harsh. Shouldnt rehabilitation be prioritized over punishment?
Can we really justify such a harsh sentence for distributing information?
Shouldnt the sentence be based on intent rather than distribution alone?
What a crazy world we live in! Do you think the sentence was fair?
Is the punishment too harsh or deserved for the anarchist student?
Deserved. Anarchy is not a valid excuse for breaking the law. Consequences are necessary for maintaining order and civility in society. If you cant play by the rules, dont be surprised when you face the consequences.
Is distributing information a crime or free speech? Lets discuss!