More Questions Than Answers in JihadJane Indictment

Since the indictment of “JihadJane” (a Pennsylvania woman named Colleen R. LaRose) was unsealed yesterday, media coverage of her case has produced more questions than answers. Indeed, although authorities have disclosed the details of LaRose’s alleged crimes – In addition to plotting the murder of a Swedish cartoonist, she’s accused of soliciting funds for terrorist organizations; helping forge passports and travel documents; and using the Internet to recruit potential killers – details about her personal history remain conspicuously absent. From the L.A. Times:

…her possible motivation was not clear Tuesday night.

“She appeared to be one of those people who spend a lot of time online and go to all these radical websites and chat rooms,” said one law enforcement source, who, like others interviewed, requested anonymity when discussing the case.

“If there was some moment in her life that changed her, I don’t know,” another law enforcement source said.

The Times interviewed a few of LaRose’s neighbors, who called her “crazy” and mentioned that she frequently talked to her cats. But apart from anecdotal snippets like these, no information has yet surfaced to give her any sort of personal context.

This is not yet a huge failure on the part of mainstream media – the story is still breaking, after all. But before this case gets tossed into the punditry pigpen, there ought to be a serious fleshing out of the “why” behind LaRose’s actions. When did she convert to Islam? Under what circumstances? What is her family history?

People don’t radicalize for no reason. LaRose’s case presents a unique opportunity to better understand what seems to be a growing phenomenon of domestic terror. Media could provide insight, but we could really blow it, too.