The three comments below were posted by others on NYT message boards. Not my words but I concur
When political organizers, however despicable their ideas, are found liable for arranging a demonstration that turns violent, all political demonstrations are at risk. Protests are quintessential First Amendment conduct and so this verdict jeopardizes all kinds of demonstrations protected by the First Amendment. I trust the case will be reversed. If not, be wary of ever organizing a political demonstration.
The 77 pages of instructions from the judge explained how engaging in a conspiracy did not require all participants to forge an agreement or meet in the same room, or even to know one another. Nor did a conspiracy require the participants to have caused the violence themselves. The main point was that they all shared an objective and could foresee the violence that occurred."
By these standards, there should be hundreds of cases filed against BLM organizers for the violence which occurred at the mostly peaceful protests last year
This verdict will very likely bite back, if held ...
If those who got official permission for a demonstration are held liable/responsible for the actions of counterprotestors and anyone other than themselves, what "responsibility of organisers" will be tried in our courts over demonstrations/protests that were not given official permission and turned into violent riots in the past or the future?
Precedent is a part of our laws and this sets a new precedent to be used in future.
It might behove many to stop and think before cheering over this, in my humble opinion.
Clearly a whole lot of citizens know little about the laws or believe laws should only be applied to some for historical, ideological or emotional reasons, not all. That is not going to happen.