I suspect some want this to be a hate crime to fit prevailing divisive narratives, but the investigation will continue on.
by Kolby LaMarche
I want to preface by saying the investigation into and the prosecution of Mr. Jason Eaton is ongoing. This article only uses information currently available and may be subject to change.
I have received numerous messages from readers interested in why I have yet to cover the shooting of three men which took place here, in Burlington, on November 25.
I haven’t because it was too early. But it’s nearly been a month now and I want to address it.
As you may know, according to investigators, on November 25 q three men of Palestinian descent were walking on North Prospect Street at night when they were approached by Jason Eaton, 48, who was carrying a handgun. Eaton, saying nothing, then discharged four rounds, striking all three victims.
It is no secret that gun violence, and crime more generally, has been on the rise in Burlington.
What happened to those three young men is beyond disturbing – as disturbing as the countless number of other victims of crime here. I wish them all a speedy recovery, both mentally and physically. No doubt, this incident will unfortunately live with them forever.
And Jason Eaton, if found guilty, should face the full weight of justice.
Following the shooting, Burlingtonians convened for vigils and rallies, prompting the city council to deliberate on a resolution advocating for a cease-fire in Gaza. Residents have voiced their condemnation of the incident, categorizing it as a targeted hate crime.
But was it?
Certain members of the public will likely want me drawn and quartered for even asking that. However, to you, the reader, I appeal to your better judgment.
We’ve witnessed the aftermath of remarkable incidents like this one before; they typically unfold in a familiar sequence of events.
A succession of media reports and public outrage typically ensues, digging into the perpetrator’s social media history, past statements, group affiliations, or, at times, a manifesto.
These discoveries can often immediately confirm, in the mind of the public, the assertion that the incident was a targeted act of hate and that the perpetrator’s motive constitutes a hate crime. And they’d usually be right.
But Eaton’s case isn’t adding up the same as others.
Countless outlets have published all the public intelligence available on Eaton. He was an intern at Harvard, a teacher, an investment advisor who oversaw $7 million worth of assets, a farmhand, and staff at a camp for at-risk youth.
Residents of Syracuse, New York, where Eaton once lived, described him as a “jack-of-all-trades” and “that hippie guy”.
From what has been gathered online, Eaton’s ideology doesn’t appear to include MAGA, or extreme Zionism, or Islamaphobia. In fact, it somewhat mirrors that of many pro-Palestinian activists. For example, in 2020, Eaton posted a meme critical of “Amerika”, lamenting the nation for its imperialism and corruption.
Most notably, since the shooting, we have had comments published from Eaton’s mother, ex-girlfriends, and friends who attest to his challenges with mental illness, depression, and a hot temper.
And, according to the victims, Eaton – who they described as a “wonky” man – stumbled down the stairs of his apartment before discharging his firearm toward them.
Within hours of the shooting, organizations and activists across the globe began banging their drums, demanding that Burlington and the federal government treat the incident as a hate crime, with the Arab American Anti-Discrimination Committee saying the shooting most definitely occurred because “the victims are Arab.”
Similar assertions were made in the case of the young Palestinian boy murdered in Plainfield, Illinois, by Joseph Czuba on October 14th. Both activists and officials, then, were quick to call it a hate crime. They seem to be right.
According to court documents, Czuba regularly listened to conservative talk radio and was growing concerned over reports of a “National Day of Jihad”. Police have also alleged that during that attack, Czuba shouted “You Muslims must die”.
Yet, in Eaton’s case, after all this time, and all of the information we have, prosecutors still do not have evidence to support a hateful, targeted motive. Eaton doesn’t have any social media indicators and he didn’t say anything during the incident.
Burlington seems to exist in two divergent realities on this.
In one, Jason Eaton attempted murder, unequivocally driven by hatred towards Arabs and Muslims.
In the other, a reality truer to ours, Eaton attempted murder, but there is no documented bias or hatred against Arabs or Muslims.
The absence of discernible proof linking the tragedy to hatred challenges the chain of events that often follows these incidents. Nonetheless, there exists a palpable desire within Burlington and across the nation for this narrative to be absolutely true.
Yes, I suspect some want this to be a hate crime, to fit prevailing divisive narratives.
The investigation into Jason Eaton remains ongoing. In American jurisprudence, facts and the untainted truth matter, and must be in complete alignment.
At the moment, the facts do not support a hate crime. But will the public, with their own version of the “truth”, put enough pressure on Vermont’s justice system to make it bend? Or will Mayor Miro Weinberger and State’s Attorney Sarah George be forced to recognize this for what it seems to be leaning towards: a random act of violence.
Burning Sky is dedicated to providing critique and commentary on the issues of the day from an unapologetic perspective, fueling change in the heart of Vermont. Authored by Kolby LaMarche every Saturday.