“When Terror Isn’t Terror“ (Editorial, Nov. 3) compliments me for “legal creativity” and applauds the conviction of Edgar Morales, but concludes that the use of the state anti-terrorism law against a “common street thug” blurs the difference between street crime and terrorism.

You apparently did not understand that the charge, which requires proof that the defendant intended to “intimidate or coerce” the population, was not entirely based on a single incident.

In addition to the shooting at the baptism on Aug. 17-18, 2002, we presented substantial evidence that the avowed purpose of Morales’ gang was to declare its members “Kings of The Bronx,” and that they accomplished this through brutality and intimidation.

Proof of some 19 specific acts of violence committed by the gang from 1999-2002 as a part of this pattern was introduced at trial.

When a community is terrorized by a lengthy pattern of horrific acts committed by an organized group whose intent is to dominate the streets, while their motives may not be political, they are not “common street thugs.” What they are engaging in is, indeed, terrorism.

Robert T. Johnson
District Attorney
The Bronx