Westminster Dog Show?

While criminal trespass makes sense, I'm sort of baffled as to how this can be construed as an act of terrorism. Their actions didn't (as far as I can tell) place any person or property (including dogs) in danger, nor can I imagine how they caused financial harm to the WKC. AETA was intended for people who damage facilities, make threats or act to cause bodily harm, and otherwise create financial loss or damage. These two caused a minor disruption, however tasteless, and went quietly when apprehended by security.

I'm also baffled as to how Westminster showcases non-purebred dogs. I'm not saying they should, only that it seems a bit far-fetched to praise them for doing something that is rather outside the realm of their mission.

 

In response to them being charged with violation of the AETA, here's a quote from the wikipedia article concerning the act:

The law prohibits "force, violence, and threats involving animal enterprises"[1] by penalizing damage or interference to animal enterprises or conspiring or attempting to damage or interfere with an animal enterprise.[1] The law does not "prohibit any expressive conduct (including peaceful picketing or other peaceful demonstration) protected from legal prohibition by the First Amendment to the Constitution,"[1]

So it seems to me that if there were "threats" against Westminster, purebred dogs, or anyone showing, they would be justified in being charged. However, if they were demonstrating peacefully, then I'm not sure how this could be relevant.

Problem is, no one really knows what they did...

 

From what I understand, they got in as regular evening spectators (bought tickets) with the signs folded up and hidden. At a certain time (while/after the Dobe was being judged) they both ran down onto the floor of the arena (the middle of the ring), unfolded their signs, and held them up for viewing until they were apprehended and escorted out by security.

It is, I suppose, slightly less peaceful than standing around outside the Garden with signs. But we're not talking about firebombing a research lab.

It is possible that they had plans for something violent - if AETA is being pursued, that would explain it. But that's really not PETA's style (they prefer splashy, tasteless demonstrations with naked ladies). Though PETA supports destructive actions (which could be prosecuted under AETA), they've been very careful about not being officially associated with them. Besides, the truly destructive groups like the ALF have much larger fish to fry than a dog show (eg. research labs).