Ohio bridge bombing plot suspect Anthony Hayne pleads guilty

Anthony Hayne pleaded to all three counts against him in US District Court. His attorney, Michael O'Shea, said Hayne hopes to get leniency in return for his testimony.

FBI/AP/File
This undated file photo provided by the FBI shows Anthony Hayne, one of five men charged with plotting to bomb a highway bridge in Ohio pleaded guilty in federal court in Akron, Ohio, on July 25, and will testify against his co-defendants.

One of five men charged with plotting to bomb an Ohio highway bridge made a surprise guilty plea Wednesday and agreed to testify against his co-defendants.

Anthony Hayne, 35, pleaded to all three counts against him in US District Court. His attorney, Michael O'Shea, said Hayne hopes to get leniency in return for his testimony.

Authorities have called the men anarchists. Investigators say the group planted what turned out to be a fake bomb provided by an FBI undercover informant on a bridge south of Cleveland and repeatedly tried to detonate it using text messages from cellphones.'

Could you pass a US citizenship test?

The defendants could face life in prison if convicted.

Under the terms of the plea deal, Hayne will have the chance to avoid a life prison term. He could face 15 years to nearly 20 years in prison.

"I don't think any of these guys intended harm to human beings," O'Shea said. "I think they just thought this was a way of making some sort of political statement. But I'm relatively confident none of these people had any desires to actually hurt anybody."

O'Shea said Hayne was a latecomer to the alleged plot and had the least standing to argue that he had been manipulated by an FBI informant.

The five had been associated with the Occupy Cleveland movement, part of a national demonstration last year against economic inequality, but organizers of the movement have tried to distance the group from the men. They say the five didn't represent it or its nonviolent philosophy.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.