A woman was arrested and charged with hate crimes after allegedly spitting on Jewish children in Brooklyn, N.Y., according to authorities.

Christina Darling, 21, approached an 8-year-old boy and his younger siblings last week and made antisemitic statements before spitting on them, the New York Police Department (NYPD) Hate Crime Task Force said on Twitter. Darling allegedly told the children that they should have been killed in the Holocaust during the incident, which took place outside the Kehal Tiferes Avrohom Ziditshov Orthodox synagogue, according to The Washington Post.

"Hitler should have killed you all," she reportedly said. "I'll kill you and know where you live."

The 8-year-old's father, Aryah Fried, told CBS New York that after Darling made the hateful comments, his son responded, saying he would save his little sister.



"I gotta teach him not to engage, but he engaged," Fried said. "And she came running back at him, spat in his face and told him 'We will kill you all, I know where you live, and we'll make sure to get you all next time.'"

Darling was charged with three counts of aggravated harassment and acting in a manner injurious to a child under 17, both of which are classified as hate crimes, according to the NYPD's task force.

She could appear in court before a Brooklyn judge Friday evening, a spokeswoman for the Brooklyn District Attorney's office told NBC News.

Sourced from The Hill.

We argue here about racism and hate crimes. I think there is no argument that this is racist and a hate crime.

Ray... when you going to learn that sh*tty humans aren't a lefty problem but are actually just a sh*tty human problem?

Remember, there's sh*tty humans on all sides Ray... all sides.

peoples suck...

Holy f*cking sh*t, you finally see!

All you can do is watch as giant multithreaded systems get hopelessly morphed into entangled messes.

Kind of fascinating if you think about it.. the nature of giant systems that is.

BGZ, what do you mean by giant multithread systems? I think I know what you mean but am not quite sure.

NO.
It's been around for centuries.

Large systems with many asynchronous operations.

Sounds a bit like "hearsay" if you ask me....

I don't condone at all "what she did" but how can you trust an 8 year old?

Supposed the kid had past run- ins with this broad?

Supposed he had it out for her???

Was it "sound taped" or just video /visual taped?

The visual video evidence is damning but who else heard the actual words? Other than 3 young kids???

Remember Jesse Smollett's diatribe of lies...

I think it is going just a tad fast...like a lynching mob...
I'd love to see better evidence from any adult who was nearby...

Difference between a wizard who raises the undead and a sexy vampire?
One is a necromancer and the other is a neck romancer

That one wasn't awful.

Broken clocks and blind squirrels and such

This is why I vacation exclusively at the Mar-a- Lago.
No minorities means not hearing the wasps sling the racism.

^... just saying.

I've said quite publicly here on this site that St. Pete is a $hithole. Hell, 99.9% of Pinellas County is too!

My legal experience is that young kids generally don't lie about sophisticated adult matters; can't keep their stories straight if they do lie; and that it is real easy to tell when they are coached

No. It is NOT hearsay.

When a witness (or three witnesses) repeat what was said to them to their face as here, it is "direct evidence" (as opposed to indirect evidence), which means that if it is true, then it proves the matter asserted.

Now, repetition of what the children said to a parent here by the parent, let's say to a cop, it IS hearsay that IS hearsay.

But, always keep in mind that there are like 30-35 exceptions, so hearsay isn't always necessarily inadmissible or not credible.

Thanks for the info RFENST...

I remember that!

Lol, I go to the site... popup, "stop tech censorship"...

Hard to take any site seriously that does this.

Tech don't censor things, people censor things... sh*tty humans...

and stupid humans...

"You can have a new heart but you have to get the shot"...

"duhhhhh, nope, not going to do it... my body my choice... except for women, they don't get one".

"Fine then die dumb azz".

Sorry... but not sorry.

What does taking the experimental JAB have to do with a heart transplant? How does that benefit his survival when the jab has been linked to many people having heart problems and even weakened immune systems? Is there some long-term data that shows the JAB improves the survival rate of transplant patients? Medical ethics my azz. Take the JAB or we'll let you DIE?

Because using an experimental vaccine as the sole or guiding (assumption herebased on the story) determination is not medically accurate, but is politically "tasty". If the vaccinated recipient goes to restaurants and eats indoors all the time, goes to concerts, etc and fails to wear a mask, while the unvaccinated one lives in a rural area and takes extreme precautions against infection, why does the check box for "vaccinated" have any bearing?

Agreed, I don't see the validity to the argument that the unvaxxed person has a lower chance of transplant success.

I can't assume 1, 2 or 3 are true because we know the regime and its cronies fudged the numbers and lied about the safety and efficacy of the experimental vaccines for political purposes.
It is therefore morally and medically ethically wrong to deny a patient critical lifesaving treatment based on those false assumptions.

Why did dad take so long to decide on a haircut?
Because he had to mullet over