Journal of Threat Assessment and Management Postdicting Violence with Sovereign Citizen Actors: an Exploratory Test of the TRAP-18 Darin J

Journal of Threat Assessment and Management Postdicting Violence With Sovereign Citizen Actors: An Exploratory Test of the TRAP-18 Darin J. Challacombe and Paul A. Lucas Online First Publication, October 1, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/tam0000105

CITATION Challacombe, D. J., & Lucas, P. A. (2018, October 1). Postdicting Violence With Sovereign Citizen Actors: An Exploratory Test of the TRAP-18. Journal of Threat Assessment and Management. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/tam0000105 Journal of Threat Assessment and Management

Postdicting Violence With Sovereign Citizen Actors: An Exploratory Test of the TRAP-18

Darin J. Challacombe Paul A. Lucas Fort Hays State University Appalachian State University

The sovereign citizen movement is one of the largest antigovernment nationalism or domestic terrorist collectives in the United States. In the last decade, over a dozen public ofﬁcials were injured or killed by individuals adhering to sovereign citizen ideology. The Terrorist Radicalization Assessment Protocol (TRAP-18; Meloy & Gill, 2016; Meloy, Habermeyer, & Guldimann, 2015) is a collection of 18 behavior-based warning signs for terror incidents which has been used to assess primarily international terrorism samples. In this study, the researchers applied the TRAP-18 to both violent and nonviolent incidents involving sovereign citizen members. Using chi-square tests for independence and a logistic regression analysis, the researchers found support for the TRAP-18. The sum of the TRAP-18 scores was able to postdict violent outcomes within the events included within the study. This important ﬁnding should guide future research on the use of the TRAP-18 involving sovereign citizens’ collectives and other domestic groups who exhibit violence.

Public Signiﬁcance Statement The present study ﬁnds the Terrorist Radicalization Assessment Protocol (TRAP- 18) tool was useful in differentiating violent domestic terrorism incidents from those that did not escalate to violence. It advances the concept that appropriately trained professionals may be able to identify warning behaviors in order to predict and prevent violent incidents.

Keywords: sovereign citizens, terrorism, radicalization, TRAP-18

The sovereign citizen movement is one of the governments are operating within their legal largest antigovernment nationalism collectives constraints. Many United States-based law en- in the United States, with an estimated 300,000 forcement and intelligence agencies, including believers (Laird, 2014; Potok, 2015). While the the Department of Homeland Security and FBI, sovereign citizen ideology varies greatly (for a will categorize antigovernment nationalists as review, see Federal Bureau of Investigation domestic terrorists at the instance when these (FBI) Counterterrorism Analysis Section, 2011; individuals take criminal action in furtherance

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. Loesser, 2015; Theret, 2012), sovereign citizens of the antigovernment ideology (Bjelopera,

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individualdo user and is not to be not disseminated broadly. believe the current federal and state 2013, 2014). The majority of individuals who believe in sovereign citizen ideals never commit crimes in furtherance of their beliefs; however, the United States has recently seen many sov- Darin J. Challacombe, Department of Psychology, Fort ereign citizens commit criminal actions ranging Hays State University; Paul A. Lucas, Department of Gov- from ﬁling false liens (e.g., paper terrorism)to ernment and Justice Studies, Appalachian State University. violence (Loesser, 2015; Theret, 2012). Correspondence concerning this article should be ad- In the past decade, researchers from a broad dressed to Darin J. Challacombe, Department of Psychol- ogy, Fort Hays State University, 600 Park Street, Hays, KS spectrum of ﬁelds have created recruitment and 67601. E-mail: [email protected] radicalization models aimed to provide a better

1 2 CHALLACOMBE AND LUCAS

understanding (and, possibly, prediction) of ter- radicalization in motivations (viz., the perspec- rorism. One such model, the Terrorist Radical- tive is one of victimization which turns into ization Assessment Protocol (TRAP-18; Meloy personal grievance), ideology (viz., extreme, & Gill, 2016; Meloy et al., 2015), consists of 18 nonstatus quo political or religious leanings), behavior-based potential warning signs: 10 dis- and causality (Chin, Gharaibeh, Woodham, & tal and eight proximal characteristics. The distal Deeb, 2016; Karakatsanis & Herzog, 2016). In- characteristics are those which may develop stead of just believing abortion is wrong, a over time but do not necessarily translate to an radicalized individual may believe a valid op- immediate risk; the eight proximal characteris- tion to stop abortion would be to kill abortion tics are those which often appear closer to an doctors. action (Meloy & Gill, 2016; Meloy et al., 2015). Radicalization researchers have created both a Several studies have utilized TRAP-18 to retro- myriad of process theories (e.g., the matrix: de actively evaluate terrorist incidents; however, to Wolf & Doosje, 2010; 12 mechanisms: McCauley date, researchers have not yet applied the & Moskalenko, 2008; and staircase to terrorism: TRAP-18 to a solely American domestic terror- Moghaddam, 2005) and structured professional ist collective of sovereign citizens or to a sam- judgment (SPJ) guidelines (Cook, Murray, ple of both violent and nonviolent incidents. Amat, & Hart, 2014). The latter were developed The present study examines how well the to allow even an outsider (e.g., clergy member, TRAP-18 is able to postdict violence. As out- teacher) to identify individuals with potential lined by Knight, Woodward, and Lancaster for group-based violence or other violent radi- (2017), the research field examining how, when, calization. Among the recent SPJ tools are the and why individuals choose violent versus non- multilevel guidelines for the assessment and violent actions is quite limited. Merari (2010) management of group-based violence (Cook, compared 15 would-be suicide bombers with a Hart, & Kropp, 2013), Identifying Vulnerable dozen individuals imprisoned for other terrorist People (Cole, Alison, Cole, Alison, & Weyers, actions, finding avoidant-dependent personality 2014), and the TRAP-18. disorder was present in more (60%) potential TRAP-18’s eight proximal warning behav- suicide bombers versus (17%) other terrorist iors evaluate conditions favorable to targeted prisoners. Other differences included both violence (Meloy & Gill, 2016; Meloy et al., higher suicidal tendencies (40% vs. 0%) and 2015): pathway (attack research, planning, or depressive symptoms (53% vs. 8%), and lower implementation), fixation (abnormal preoccupa- psychopathic and impulsive-unstable tenden- tion on an individual or cause), identification cies (Merari, 2010). Based on case studies of (self-identification as a fighter/warrior/agent of violent versus nonviolent individuals, other re- change), novel aggression (an initial violent ac- searchers suggest violently radicalized individ- tion unrelated to the target), energy burst (in- uals showed the decision to be emotional, so- creased frequency/variety of behaviors related cial, and status conscious (Bartlett & Miller, to the targeted individual or cause leading up to 2012). McCauley and Moskalenko (2014) sug- a violent incident), leakage (communication to gested there may be at least two characteristic an outside party of the individual’s intent for profiles for lone offenders. These studies only violence), last resort (individual feeling there is focus on Islamic terrorism lone offenders no other way to solve the grievance than vio- (Knight et al., 2017; McCauley & Moskalenko, lence, and for that violence to be now), and This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. 2010). With this in mind, this study will apply directly communicated threat (communication This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. the TRAP-18 to recent incidents involving a of violence to target or law enforcement before United States-based domestic extremist collec- action). These warning signs were identified tive: sovereign citizens. through dozens of case studies, interviews, and other empirical research (Meloy & Gill, 2016; Terrorism Radicalization and TRAP-18 Meloy & O’Toole, 2011; Meloy, Hoffmann, Guldimann, & James, 2012; Silver, Horgan, & Terrorism radicalization is the process of an Gill, 2018). individual deciding to move toward terrorist Meloy and Gill’s (2016) 10 distal character- ideals (Young, Rooze, & Holsappel, 2015). istics hone on the individual’s lone-actor status: This type of radicalization differs from political personal grievance and moral outrage (conflu- POSTDICTING VIOLENCE WITH SOVEREIGN CITIZEN ACTORS 3

ence of factors shaping an individual to have a known to have connections to other antigovern- strong viewpoint about the targeted individual ment groups (Bjelopera, 2013; Gruenewald, or cause), framed by an ideology (justifying Chermak, & Freilich, 2013; Hunter & Heinke, beliefs for action), failure to affiliate with an 2011; Meyer, 2013; Weir, 2015). Since April extremist group (failure/rejection of individual 1995, other self-identified sovereign citizens with desired terrorist or other group), depen- have been associated with incidents that esca- dence on virtual community (communication lated into violence (Hersterman, 2013; Laird, using social media and other online vectors with 2014). The May 2010 killing of two West Mem- like-minded individuals), thwarting of occupa- phis, Arkansas, police officers by self-identified tional goals (setback/failure in academic/life father-son sovereign citizens Jerry and Joseph pursuits), changes in thinking and emotions Kane and the July 2016 killing of three police (thinking pattern becomes absolute and simplis- officers in Louisiana by sovereign citizen Gavin tic), failure of sexual-intimate pair bonding (in- Eugene Long reinforce this linkage (Sturgis, dividual fails to sexually or intimately bond), 2016; Swenson, 2012). mental disorder (historic or present major men- The sovereign movement, sans these inci- tal health disorder), greater creativity and inno- dents, is not one of violence. According to most vation (innovative terrorist action or process sovereign theories, the main sovereign griev- imitated by others), and criminal violence (past ance narrative is that the existing United States criminal history). government actually replaced the original, com- Meloy et al. (2015) initially applied TRAP- mon law government established by the found- 18’s eight proximal warning signs to the Anders ing fathers (Crowell, 2012; FBI Counterterror- Breivik case. Breivik, the Norwegian lone ter- ism Analysis Section, 2011). This governmental rorist responsible for killing 77 individuals in change occurred sometime in the past—usually July 2011, was found to have evidence of six of believed between the 1850s (Civil War or the eight warning signs. In their seminal study, Emancipation) and the 1930s (Great Depres- Meloy and Gill (2016) applied the full sion), when the United States went off the “gold TRAP-18 to a sample of 111 lone-actor terror- standard” (Loesser, 2015; Theret, 2012). There- ists identified in a previous work (Gill, Horgan, fore, the current government, with its enforce- & Deckert, 2014). This sample included radical Islamic extremists, extreme right-wing terror- ment of taxes and other regulations, limits indi- ists, and single-issue terrorists spanning from viduals in their ability to live free. 1990 to 2013 (Gill, 2015). The bulk of the Sovereign citizens often see their movement sample (43%) were defined as Al-Qaida- as a way to not only get out from under a inspired (Gill et al., 2014), with 34% being tyrannical government, but a way to free them- right-wing terrorists. Of the right-wing terror- selves from debt (Laird, 2014; Loesser, 2015). ists, specific examples included Ted Kaczynski According to prevailing sovereign theories, the (Unabomber), Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma existing United States government is a corpora- City bomber), and Eric Rudolph (Olympic Park tion that uses citizens as collateral for its debts. bomber). Meloy and Gill (2016) found 70% of When a person is born, the United States gov- the entire sample exhibited at least half of the ernment establishes a Department of Treasury TRAP-18 characteristics, with all 111 exhibit- account for the citizen. Sovereigns, in a process ing the “framed by an ideology” characteristic. referred to as “freeing the strawman,” can com- This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. In their case study on the 2011 Frankfort, plete a series of tasks—court filing, apostille This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. Germany, airport attack, Böckler, Hoffmann, acquiring, notary public notations—to access and Zick (2015) found the individual who con- these United States Treasury funds (Loesser, ducted this attack against American soldiers 2015; MacNabb, 2010; Theret, 2012). Many exhibited nine distal and six proximal signs— sovereigns also view public order regulations over 80% of the TRAP-18’s indicators. (e.g., driver’s licenses, vehicle registrations) as unnecessary under the common law system. Sovereign Citizens When challenged, sovereign citizens will often quote archaic or esoteric laws that stipulate McVeigh’s Oklahoma City bombing cocon- driver’s licenses are only needed for commer- spirator, Terry Nichols, was a sovereign citizen cial vehicle use. It is in these interactions with 4 CHALLACOMBE AND LUCAS

law enforcement and public officials where the Table 1 incident may become tense. Sex and Mean Scores for Violent and Non-Violent The sovereign movement’s origins can be Sovereign Citizen Incidents traced to racism and anti-Semitism, but its cur- Violent Nonviolent rent form generally lacks these caveats (South- ern Poverty Law Center, n.d.). Modern day fol- Sex MSDnMSDn lowers often refer to themselves as “freemen” or Male “sovereigns,” or may participate in one of many TRAP-18 score 7.14 3.45 29 2.67 2.11 21 loosely organized groups like the Republic for Female the united [sic] States of America (RuSA) or the TRAP-18 score 8.0 1 1.86 1.35 7 Moorish Nation (FBI Counterterrorism Analy- Note. TRAP-18 Terrorist Radicalization Assessment Pro- sis Section, 2011; Laird, 2014). RuSA’s goal, tocol. for example, is “to stabilize America and its economy, with the intent of freeing the Ameri- can People and People around the world from press releases. All the incidents occurred be- [the US Corporation, posing as the Federal tween 2004 and 2014. Using the search terms Government]” (RuSA, 2014, p. 1). “sovereign,” “freeman,” and “paperless,” the The importance of the current study is two- researchers initially identified 43 violent and 30 fold: it is the first study to apply the TRAP-18 nonviolent individuals or groups. Fifteen indi- specifically to individuals associated with the viduals were not included in the analysis due to American sovereign citizen movement, and it is the inability to connect them to the sovereign the first study to apply TRAP-18 to groups of citizen ideology, either through membership in individuals who did not resort to violent behav- a known organization (e.g., RuSA), self- ior. Given the exploratory nature of our study, identification as a sovereign citizen, or designa- the primary research question is as follows: is tion by a federal agency. the TRAP-18 an effective tool in postdicting The researchers coded violent or dangerous violence in incidents involving members of the behaviors as: sovereign citizen movement? This is also the first study to examine differences between vio- the intentional use of physical force or power, threat- lent and nonviolent individuals associated with ened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or a United States-based domestic terrorism col- has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, lective. psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation. (World Health Organization, 2002, p. 5) Method The incidents classified as violent included shootings, standoffs, high-speed pursuits, or Sample threats, and the violent sample represented 10 individuals killed and 15 injured. For nonvio- The sample consists of 58 United States- lent incidents, the researchers looked for indi- based individuals or groups associated with the viduals who had committed or were believed to sovereign citizen movement. Of these, 30 indi- have committed a nonviolent crime, such as viduals or groups planned or committed violent paper terrorism. or dangerous actions, and 28 individuals com- This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. mitted nonviolent criminal actions (Table 1).

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. Data Collection and Analysis Both samples were nonrandom samples of con- venience. Fort Hays State University’s Institu- Using a process similar to Gruenewald et al. tional Review Board (IRB) determined on June (2013), the researchers applied systematic 7, 2017 that this project was exempt from IRB search techniques to uncover as much open review according to federal regulations. source material available. The researchers uti- The researchers identiﬁed the incidents lized various search engines (e.g., Google, Ya- through LexisNexus, the Southern Poverty Law hoo), paid databases (e.g., LexisNexus, Pro- Center, the Global Terrorism Database devel- quest, Westlaw), and the Homeland Security oped by the National Consortium for the Study Digital Library to identify relevant information. of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, and The primary researcher organized dossiers con- POSTDICTING VIOLENCE WITH SOVEREIGN CITIZEN ACTORS 5

taining all the available information on each ence (Cohen’s d) between the violent and non- individual or group. violent samples was 1.70. Since this is the first examination of whether A chi-square test for independence was ini- the TRAP-18 can postdict violence within a tially run for each individual item on the United States-based domestic sample, the re- TRAP-18 against the dependent variable of vi- searchers wanted to best understand which olence (Table 2). The researchers were unable items on the TRAP-18 were associated with to run the chi-square analysis on three items: violent incidents within the sampled events. For fixation, dependence on virtual community, and the analytical approach, discrete chi-square tests change in thinking, which were present in all for independence were run for each of the indi- the cases (N ϭ 58). However, these three vari- vidual items within the TRAP-18 to explore ables were included in the final logistic regres- each individual item’s relationship with the de- sion model. pendent variable: whether the incident involved Six proximal warning behaviors and four dis- violence. Then, a binary logistic regression tal behaviors showed significant association to analysis was performed to assess the impact of the incidents containing violence. Among the the independent variable, the score of the six significant proximal behaviors, four (e.g., TRAP-18 across all items, on whether the inci- pathway, identification, leakage, and last resort) dent contained violence. were positively related to violence, and the remaining two (e.g., novel aggression and energy Interrater Reliability burst) were negatively related to violence. Novel aggression showed the weakest effect 2 Two raters evaluated the whole sample (N ϭ size, ␹ (1, N ϭ 58) ϭ 6.19, p ϭ .045, phi ϭ .33, 2 58; 1,044 codings) using the TRAP-18 code- followed by energy burst and leakage, ␹ (1, 2 book (Meloy, 2017) against information from N ϭ 58) ϭ 9.94, p ϭ .007, phi ϭ .41, and ␹ (1, the dossiers. After reviewing Meloy and Gill N ϭ 58) ϭ 10.21, p ϭ .006, phi ϭ .42, respec- (2016) and Gruenewald et al. (2013), a psychol- tively. Pathway and identification showed 2 ogy graduate student (Ariana Fisher; Rater 2) nearly similar effect sizes, ␹ (1, N ϭ 58) ϭ 2 and the primary researcher (Rater 1) completed 11.37, p ϭ .003, phi ϭ .44, and ␹ (1, N ϭ the ratings independently. For each participant, 58) ϭ 11.65, p ϭ .003, phi ϭ .45, with last 2 the raters indicated whether each TRAP-18 resort having the strongest, ␹ (1, N ϭ 58) ϭ ϭ ϭ characteristic was absent, present, or unknown 27.76, p .000, phi .70. (coded as 0 ϭ absent,1ϭ present, and 2 ϭ Among the four significant distal character- unknown). Average Cohen’s kappa was good istics, all four were positively related to violent for the proximal characteristics, ␬ϭ.687, and incidents. Thwarting of occupational goals had ␹2 ϭ ϭ excellent for the distal characteristics, ␬ϭ.812. a medium effect size, (1, N 58) 6.46, ϭ ϭ The average for the entire TRAP-18 was excel- p .040, phi .33. Framed by an ideology had ␹2 ϭ ϭ lent, ␬ϭ.757. For the analyses, Rater 2’s a strong effect size with (1, N 58) 13.76, ϭ ϭ codings were utilized. p .001, phi .49. Both personal grievance and criminal violence were the strongest of the distal characteristics, ␹2(1, N ϭ 58) ϭ 14.95, Results p ϭ .001, phi ϭ .51, and ␹2(1, N ϭ 58) ϭ 16.83, p ϭ .000, phi ϭ .54, respectively. The This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. The current exploratory study examines remaining five variables did not show signifi- This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. whether the TRAP-18 can be used to postdict cance. violence within a sample of 58 individuals or Next, a binary logistic regression was per- groups associated with the sovereign citizen formed to assess the impact of TRAP-18 score movement. For an overall TRAP-18 score, the on the likelihood of violence occurring within researchers summed the present variables with a the sampled incidents involving sovereign citi- potential upper limit score of 18 (see Table 1). zens. Using the summed TRAP-18 score as the The mean scores were low for the overall sam- one independent variable, the full model was ple, 4.90 (SD ϭ 3.65), and for both the violent, statistically significant, ␹2(1, N ϭ 58) ϭ 33.88, 7.17 (SD ϭ 3.40), and nonviolent, 2.46 (SD ϭ p Ͻ .000. This suggests the TRAP-18 model, in 1.95), samples. The standardized mean differ- total, was able to distinguish between the indi- 6 CHALLACOMBE AND LUCAS

Table 2 Chi-Square Test for Independence Using TRAP-18 Frequencies for Violent and Nonviolent Events

Violent Nonviolent Warning behavior n % n % ␹2(1) p Pathway 18 31 10 17 11.37 .003 Fixation 29 50 0 0 Identiﬁcation 42 74 2 3 11.65 .003 Novel aggression 3 5 32 55 6.19 .045 Energy burst 7 12 17 29 9.94 .007 Leakage 14 24 12 20 10.21 .006 Last resort 17 29 5 9 27.76 .000 Directly communicated threat 14 24 9 15 2.87 .238 Personal grievance and moral outrage 22 38 5 9 14.95 .001 Framed by an ideology 42 72 2 3 13.76 .001 Failure to afﬁliate 5 9 16 28 5.97 .051 Dependence on a virtual community 15 26 0 0 Thwarted occupational goals 9 16 13 22 6.46 .040 Changes in thinking and emotion 10 17 0 0 Failure of sexual-intimate pair bondin 7 12 17 29 5.16 .076 Mental disorder 9 16 2 3 2.90 .234 Greater creativity 4 7 40 69 8.11 .071 Criminal violence 16 28 13 22 16.83 .000 Note. TRAP-18 ϭ Terrorist Radicalization Assessment Protocol.

vidual cases within the sample that were violent eign citizen sample. Unlike other TRAP-18 re- and nonviolent. The model as a whole explained search (Böckler et al., 2015; Meloy & Gill, between 44.2% (Cox and Snell R2) and 59% 2016), this is believed to be the first study to (Nagelkerke R2) of the variance in the presence apply the TRAP-18 to both violent and nonvi- of violence, and correctly classified 75.9% of olent incidents. As Cook (2014) stated, there is cases. As shown in Table 3, the TRAP-18 an increasing need to couple group- and indi- scores made a unique statistically significant vidual-level characteristics in order to better contribution to the model, recording an odds understand and respond to violent incidents. ratio of 2.10. This indicated that those with a Furthermore, it has been argued that SPJ tools higher TRAP-18 score were over two times have the potentially viable and important use for more likely to be involved in a violent incident, better understanding violence within groups, es- controlling for all other factors in the model. pecially within organized crime and, as the focus of the current study, the sovereign citizen Discussion collective (Burton & Amat, 2013; Egan et al., 2016; Van Allen, 2012). This study applied the 10 distal characteris- Following Monahan’s (2012) conclusion that tics and eight proximal warning behaviors of an SPJ approach to addressing risk for violence This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individualMeloy user and is not to be disseminated broadly. and Gill’s (2016) TRAP-18 to a sover- may be useful if researchers are able to identify

Table 3 Summary of Binary Regression Analysis Predicting Violence Within Sovereign Citizen Incidents

Variable BSEOR 95% CI Wald statistic p Sum of TRAP-18 scores .74 .20 2.10 [1.43, 3.09] 14.12 .000 Note. TRAP-18 ϭ Terrorist Radicalization Assessment Protocol; CI ϭ conﬁdence interval for odds ratio (OR). POSTDICTING VIOLENCE WITH SOVEREIGN CITIZEN ACTORS 7

robust individual risk factors using retrospec- ally self-identify as it. It is quite possible the tive information on known groups, the research- open source information did not allow the raters ers found that the TRAP-18, as a whole, was to clearly identify fixation behaviors in the non- able to successfully postpredict violent behavior violent sample. within the sample. This finding is an important first step toward the utilization of the TRAP-18 Limitations and Future Research as an SPJ tool to assess violence within United As hinted above, the main limitation to this States-based domestic groups. research is the lack of information, and, hence, While not fully capable of responding to the lack of variables. This is always a concern Gøtzsche-Astrup’s (2018) request for causal when retroactively evaluating incidents. Even versus correlational research, the current re- with a broad investigative arm, there will be search aimed to identify the antecedents of vi- intelligence gaps regarding incidents or people. olent behavior. Interestingly, six proximal As such, the data and results could actually (pathway, identification, novel aggression, en- indicate something completely different if ergy burst, leakage, and last resort) and four greater access to sensitive or complete informa- distal (personal grievance, framed by an ideol- tion was obtained. ogy, greater creativity, and criminal violence) The current results support the criterion va- TRAP-18 variables significantly postdicted vi- lidity of the TRAP-18, in its entirety, to postdict olence in the current sample. The current proj- violent or dangerous behaviors in the sample; ect used a sample of individuals with analogous however, the variance in results compared with belief patterns who expressed their views using other studies may indicate that sovereign citi- both violent and nonviolent methods and this zens or domestic terrorists exhibit different difference between their belief expressions was warning signs than other types of terrorists. To detected by the TRAP-18 tool in its entirety. further unpack this, future research should focus The nuances illuminated by the current study the application of the TRAP-18 on other types may indicate sovereign citizens, or domestic of domestic terrorism. Much more research terrorists, in general, potentially exhibit differ- needs to be conducted before any claims can be ent warning signs than traditional international made regarding the use of the TRAP-18 with terrorists. For instance, the absence of a directly domestic violent groups and events. However, communicated threat as significant may indicate the current study is an important first step to- violent sovereign citizens are often more impul- ward realizing the capability of the TRAP-18 as sive on their actions. The lack of information being able to postdict violence within these related to virtual communities is likely due to events. this communication medium not being as prom- inent as others or law enforcement failing to reveal the information to the press. References As discussed in both Silver et al. (2018) and Meloy and O’Toole (2011), leakage is a com- Bartlett, J., & Miller, C. (2012). The edge of violence: Towards telling the difference between vi- mon predictor in violent incidents, and, as out- olent and non-violent radicalization. Terrorism lined by Silver et al. (2018), leakage is often and Political Violence, 24, 1–21. http://dx.doi.org/ related to personal grievance. Both leakage and 10.1080/09546553.2011.594923 personal grievance were significant in the sam- Bjelopera, J. P. (2013, January 17). The domestic This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. ple and positively related to violence. terrorist threat: Background and issues for Con- This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. The absence of fixation is important to note. gress. Retrieved from the Congressional Research Meloy et al. (2012) found fixation—or progres- Service website: www.crs.gov sive obsessions with the target—as an important Bjelopera, J. P. (2014, August 15). Domestic terror- warning behavior across different groups. The ism appears to be reemerging as a priority at the absence of it in the nonviolent sample is inter- Department of Justice. Retrieved from the Con- gressional Research Service website: www.crs.gov esting while coupled with the significance of Böckler, N., Hoffmann, J., & Zick, A. (2015). The identification. Meloy et al. (2012) suggested Frankfurt Airport attack: A case study on the rad- fixation and identification may be elements on a icalization of a lone-actor terrorist. Journal of similar continuum, where an individual is fo- Threat Assessment and Management, 2(3–4), 153– cused on something so much that they eventu- 163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/tam0000045 8 CHALLACOMBE AND LUCAS

Burton, S., & Amat, G. (2013, April). Application of sic Sciences, 59, 425–435. http://dx.doi.org/10 police authored threat assessment: Witness protec- .1111/1556-4029.12312 tion cases involving organized crime. Paper pre- Gøtzsche-Astrup, O. (2018). The time for causal de- sented at the annual meeting of the Association of signs: Review and evaluation of empirical support European Threat Assessment Professionals, Vi- for mechanisms of political radicalisation. Aggres- enna, Austria. sion and Violent Behavior, 39, 90–99. http://dx.doi Chin, M., Gharaibeh, S., Woodham, J., & Deeb, G. .org/10.1016/j.avb.2018.02.003 (2016). A national strategy framework for coun- Gruenewald, J., Chermak, S., & Freilich, J. D. tering violent extremism in Jordan. Journal of In- (2013). Far-right lone wolf homicides in the ternational Affairs, 69, 115–132. United States. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 36, Cole, J., Alison, E., Cole, B., Alison, L., & Weyers, J. 1005–1024. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1057610X (2014). Identifying vulnerable persons to violent ex- .2013.842123 tremism. Retrieved from http://www.tacticaldecision Hersterman, J. L. (2013). The terrorist-criminal nex- making.org/2015/05/14/identifying-vulnerable-persons- us: An alliance of international drug cartels, or- ivp-to-violent-extremism/ ganized crime, and terror groups. Boca Raton, FL: Cook, A. N. (2014, April). Risk assessment and man- CRC Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/b14565 agement of group-based violence (Doctoral disser- Hunter, R., & Heinke, D. (2011). Sovereign citizens: tation). Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British A growing domestic threat to law enforcement. Columbia, Canada. Retrieved from summit.sfu.ca/ Retrieved from https://leb.fbi.gov/2011/september/ system/files/iritems1/14289/etd8437_ACook.pdf sovereign-citizens-a-growing-domestic-threat-to- Cook, A. N., Hart, S. D., & Kropp, P. R. (2013). law-enforcement Multilevel guidelines for the assessment and man- Karakatsanis, L., & Herzog, M. (2016). Radicalisa- agement of group-based violence. Burnaby, British tion as form: Beyond the security paradigm. Jour- Columbia, Canada: Mental Health, Law, and Pol- nal of Contemporary European Studies, 24, 199– icy Institute, Simon Fraser University. 206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14782804.2016 Cook, A. N., Murray, A. A., Amat, G., & Hart, S. D. .1171009 (2014). Using structured professional judgment Knight, S., Woodward, K., & Lancaster, G. L. J. guidelines in threat assessment and management: (2017). Violent versus nonviolent actors: An em- Presentation, analysis, and formulation of a case of pirical study of different types of extremism. Jour- serial intimate partner violence. Journal of Threat nal of Threat Assessment and Management, 4, Assessment and Management, 1, 67–86. http://dx 230–248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/tam0000086 .doi.org/10.1037/tam0000011 Crowell, M. (2012, November). A quick guide to sov- Laird, L. (2014). “Sovereign citizens” plaster courts ereign citizens. Retrieved from https://www.sog.unc with bogus legal filings—Terrorists nd some turn .edu/sites/www.sog.unc.edu/files/additional_files/ to violence. ABA Journal, 100, 52–58. Sovereign%20citizens%20briefing%20paper%20Nov Loesser, C. E. (2015). From paper terrorists to cop %2012_1.pdf killers: The sovereign citizen threat. North Caro- de Wolf, A., & Doosje, B. (2010). Aanpak van Radi- lina Law Review, 93, 1106. calisme: Een psychologische analyse. Amsterdam, MacNabb, J. J. (2010, August 1). “Sovereign” Citizen the Netherlands: SWP. Kane. Retrieved from Southern Poverty Law Center Egan, V., Cole, J., Cole, B., Alison, L., Alison, E., website: https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/ Waring, S., & Elntib, S. (2016). Can you identify intelligence-report/2010/sovereign-citizen-kane violent extremists using a screening checklist and McCauley, C., & Moskalenko, S. (2008). Mechanisms of open-source intelligence alone? Journal of Threat political radicalization: Pathways toward terrorism. Ter- Assessment and Management, 3, 21–36. http://dx rorism and Political Violence, 20, 415–433. http://dx .doi.org/10.1037/tam0000058 .doi.org/10.1080/09546550802073367 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. Federal Bureau of Investigation Counterterrorism McCauley, C., & Moskalenko, S. (2010). Do suicide This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is notAnalysis to be disseminated broadly. Section. (2011). Sovereign citizens: A terrorists have personality problems? A review of: growing domestic threat to law enforcement. FBI Ariel Merari. Driven to death: Psychological and Law Enforcement Bulletin, 80, 20–24. social aspects of suicide terrorism. Nancy Harte- Gill, P. (2015). Toward a scientific approach to identi- velt Kobrin. The banality of suicide terrorism: The fying and understanding indicators of radicalization naked truth about the psychology of Islamic sui- and terrorist intent: Eight key problems. Journal of cide bombing. Terrorism and Political Violence, Threat Assessment and Management, 2(3–4), 187– 23, 108–130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09546553 191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/tam0000047 .2011.533074 Gill, P., Horgan, J., & Deckert, P. (2014). Bombing McCauley, C., & Moskalenko, S. (2014). Toward a alone: Tracing the motivations and antecedent be- profile of lone wolf terrorists: What moves an haviors of lone-actor terrorists. Journal of Foren- individual from radical opinion to radical action. POSTDICTING VIOLENCE WITH SOVEREIGN CITIZEN ACTORS 9

Terrorism and Political Violence, 26, 69–85. Southern Poverty Law Center. (n.d.). Sovereign citi- http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2014.849916 zens movement. Retrieved from https://www Meloy, J. R. (2017). TRAP-18 users manual 1.0. .splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/ Toronto, Ontario: Multihealth Systems. sovereign-citizens-movement Meloy, J. R., & Gill, P. (2016). The lone-actor ter- Sturgis, S. (2016, July 21). “Sovereign citizens” leave a rorist and the TRAP-18. Journal of Threat Assess- trail of anti-government violence across the South. Re- ment and Management, 3, 37–52. http://dx.doi.org/ trieved from https://www.facingsouth.org/2016/07/ 10.1037/tam0000061 sovereign-citizens-leave-trail-anti-government-violence- Meloy, J. R., Habermeyer, E., & Guldimann, A. across-south (2015). The warning behaviors of Anders Breivik. Swenson, D. (2012, October 6). Violent clashes with Journal of Threat Assessment and Management, 2, sovereign citizens across the U. S.: Interactive map. The Times-Picayune. Retrieved from http://www 164–175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/tam0000037 .nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2012/10/violent_clashes_ Meloy, J. R., Hoffmann, J., Guldimann, A., & James, with_sovereign.html D. (2012). The role of warning behaviors in threat The Republic for the united States of America. (2014). assessment: An exploration and suggested typol- Executive summary of the Republic. Retrieved from ogy. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 30, 256–279. http://dev.republicoftheunitedstates.org/wp-content/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bsl.999 uploads/2014/04/Executive-Summary-24Apr2014- Meloy, J. R., & O’Toole, M. E. (2011). The concept final.pdf of leakage in threat assessment. Behavioral Sci- Theret, M. (2012). Sovereign citizens: A homegrown ences & the Law, 29, 513–527. http://dx.doi.org/ terrorist threat and its negative impact on South 10.1002/bsl.986 Carolina. South Carolina Law Review, 63, 853– Merari, A. (2010). Driven to death: Psychological 885. and social aspects of suicide terrorism. New York, Van Allen, J. (2012, September). Freeman sovereign NY: Oxford University Press. citizens. Paper presented at the annual meeting the Meyer, A. (2013, February 12). Sovereign citizens in of the Canadian Threat Assessment Professionals, Oklahoma. Retrieved from http://kfor.com/2013/02/ Banff, Canada. 12/investigation-sovereign-citizens-in-oklahoma/ Weir, J. P. (2015). Sovereign citizens: A reasoned Moghaddam, F. M. (2005). The staircase to terror- response to the madness. Lewis & Clark Law Re- ism: A psychological exploration. American Psy- view, 19, 829–870. chologist, 60, 161–169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ World Health Organization. (2002). World report on 0003-066X.60.2.161 violence and health. Geneva, Switzerland: World Monahan, J. (2012). The individual risk assessment Health Organization. Retrieved from http://www of terrorism. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, .who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/ 18, 167–205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025792 world_report/en/ Potok, M. (2015). The year in hate and extremism, Young, H. F., Rooze, M., & Holsappel, J. (2015). 2010. Retrieved from https://www.splcenter.org/ Translating conceptualizations into practical sug- gestions: What the literature on radicalization can fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2015/year-hate- offer to practitioners. Peace and Conflict: Journal and-extremism-0 of Peace Psychology, 21, 212–225. http://dx.doi Silver, J., Horgan, J., & Gill, P. (2018). Foreshadow- .org/10.1037/pac0000065 ing targeted violence: Assessing leakage of intent by public mass murderers. Aggression and Violent Received March 8, 2018 Behavior, 38, 94–100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j Revision received July 5, 2018 .avb.2017.12.002 Accepted August 6, 2018 Ⅲ This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.