Man arrested in Lafayette anti-Trump rally says he was defending woman, but politics irrelevant
Jeremy Marks, 36, said in an interview Monday that he did not expect to find himself in a social media firestorm after going with his fiancee to the protest, part of the national "Hands Off! Mass Mobilization" movement involving cities around the country. It has been estimated that nearly 1,000 people attended the Tippecanoe County event.
His fiancee, Leslie Glossic, said she attended the rally to address Palestinian issues. But Marks said he went along just to support Glossic.
"I can give two f---s about politics," he said.
'Jeremy did not get involved with this man because he was a Trump supporter," Glossic agreed Monday. "He intervened because of the behavior he was showing as a human."
A Journal & Courier video shows the altercation involving Marks and the other man now identified by Lafayette police Sgt. Shawn Verma as James Jordan, 43, of Lafayette. Allegedly angry because a stream of protesters were crossing Third Street, preventing him from turning onto the street, Jordan left his truck and can be seen in the video confronting protesters.
In the video, Marks and Jordan are arguing before Marks headbutts him, leaving Jordan with a bloody nose. Jordan returns to his truck, which he parked in traffic on Columbia Street, and returns to the crowd of protesters in front of the courthouse with what looks like an assault rifle.
Glossic said it was only about five minutes after they arrived at the protest when Jordan exited his truck, setting off the chain of events.
'I heard a bunch of commotion and I looked up and I see some guy getting out his truck,' Marks said Monday. 'I seen him walk up to the crossing guards … I seen him put his hands on an older lady.'
Marks and Jordan yelled at each other before Nate Ault, a helper with the protest, put hands on the back of Marks' shoulders. Shortly after Ault touches Marks, he headbutted Jordan.
'I know people have my arms and I just, I just lost it and just headbutted,' he said. 'I didn't do it for no other reason but for that old lady. He shouldn't (have) put his hands on that old lady.'
Asked whether he regretted hitting Jordan, Marks replied, 'Not at all,' because 'he put his hands on that woman.'
Near the end of the video, Jordan is seen walking north down Third Street with his rifle and his nose bloodied, yelling at protesters.
Eyewitnesses including Glossic said they saw Jordan weaving through the crowd with the rifle. Marks said that looking back at the video, he thought Jordan was going to shoot him, so he backed away into the crowd.
'(Jordan) saw (Marks leaving) and tried to follow him into the crowd, at which point Nate (Ault) and Erika (Allen, an organizer) tried to stop him, and I saw him point the gun right at Nate's stomach,' Glossic said. 'He had pointed it at his stomach so that he would try to, you know, he didn't want (Ault) stopping him. That's how he was able to get into the crowd.'
Ault said Saturday that the gun was pointed at his stomach.
Lafayette police handcuffed Jordan and drove him away in a police cruiser. But police later released him, saying they determined he had not threatened or pointed his gun at anyone and had retrieved the gun to defend himself.
Verma said Monday police are still gathering information about whether Jordan intimidated others at the protest.
'LPD has cameras downtown and to verify what he was telling when detained. In those video footages, the officers on scene advised the truck driver had a green light,' Verma said Monday. 'Now, there is some talk that he may have had a green light but was the pedestrian walk signal still going? We can't see if it was still on.'
Glossic said it was.
'(Jordan is) stating that they waited several light cycles and nobody moved. That's not true," she said. "The walking light was counting down when (Jordan) was trying to turn right. He did not have the right of way.'
After Marks saw the video of the headbutt on social media later Saturday, he said he knew he'd be arrested.
'I wasn't surprised. I knew it was a matter of time before the police were going to come get me,' he said. 'The police know me; they know me by face.'
He was arrested from his home about 7 p.m. Saturday, he said, on a preliminary battery charge. He bonded out of the Tippecanoe County Jail.
He said he was in legal trouble "a couple of years ago, but that's all behind me," he said. "It's all done and over with, in the past."
The day after the protest, Stacey Bogan, one of the protest organizers, started a GoFundMe to help pay legal fees for Marks. But by Monday, it had vanished. Glossic said donations had reached nearly $15,000.
'We're sending you this message to tell you that, after further review, your GoFundMe account was removed because it violates our Terms of Service … specifically, the content of your fundraiser falls under our 'Prohibited Conduct' section,' an email from GoFundMe reads.
The email said all donations made to the fundraiser that weren't already transferred to the bank account on file would be refunded. Glossic said none of the money was transferred to them.
Meanwhile, Tippecanoe County Prosecutor Patrick Harrington thanked the public for forwarding more information in Saturday's events to his office and to police. He said in a news release Monday afternoon that when the investigation is complete, "we will meet with LPD to review the evidence."
This article originally appeared on Lafayette Journal & Courier: Man arrested in Lafayette anti-Trump rally says he was defending woman
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
a few seconds ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
20 states and DC sue DOJ to stop immigration requirements on victim funds
A coalition of attorneys general from 20 states and Washington, D.C., is asking a federal judge to stop the U.S. Department of Justice from withholding federal funds earmarked for crime victims if states don't cooperate with the Trump administration's immigration enforcement efforts. The lawsuit filed Monday in Rhode Island federal court seeks to block the Justice Department from enforcing conditions that would cut funding to a state or subgrantee if it refuses to honor civil immigration enforcement requests, denies U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers access to facilities or fails to provide advance notice of release dates of individuals possibly wanted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement because of their immigration status. The lawsuit asks that the conditions be thrown out, arguing that the administration and the agency are overstepping their constitutional and administrative authority. The lawsuit also argues that the requirements are not permitted or outlined in the Victims of Crime Act, known as VOCA, and would interfere with policies created to ensure victims and witnesses report crimes without fear of deportation. 'These people did not ask for this status as a crime victim. They don't breakdown neatly across partisan lines, but they share one common trait, which is that they've suffered an unimaginable trauma,' New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin said during a video news conference Monday, calling the administration's threat to withhold funds 'the most heinous act' he's seen in politics. The federal conditions were placed on VOCA funding, which provides more than a billion dollars annually to states for victims compensation programs and grants that fund victims assistance organizations. VOCA funding comes entirely from fines and penalties in federal court cases, not from tax dollars. Every state and territory has a victims compensation program that follows federal guidelines, but largely is set up under state law to provide financial help to crime victims, including medical expense reimbursement, paying for crime scene cleanup, counseling or helping with funeral costs for homicide victims. VOCA covers the cost of about 75% of state compensation program awards. Advocates and others argue that the system needs to protect victims regardless of their immigration status and ensure that reporting a crime does not lead to deportation threats. They also say that marginalized communities, such as newly arrived immigrants, are more likely to be crime targets. 'The federal government is attempting to use crime victim funds as a bargaining chip to force states into doing its bidding on immigration enforcement,' New York Attorney General Letitia James, who also joined the lawsuit, said in a statement Monday. 'These grants were created to help survivors heal and recover, and we will fight to ensure they continue to serve that purpose … We will not be bullied into abandoning any of our residents.' The Associated Press left a message seeking comment from a DOJ spokesperson Monday afternoon. President Donald Trump's administration has sought to withhold or pull back other federal funding or grant funding midstream, saying awardees and programs no longer agree with its priorities. In April, it canceled about $800 million in DOJ grants, some of which were awarded to victims service and survivor organizations. And in June, states filed a lawsuit over added requirements in Violence Against Women Act funding that mandated applicants agree not to promote 'gender ideology,' or run diversity, equity and inclusion programs or prioritize people in the country illegally. Several attorneys general said the VOCA conditions appear to be another way the administration is targeting so-called sanctuary jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities, though there is no clear definition of what a sanctuary state or city is. The Trump administration earlier this month released an updated list of states, cities and counties it considers sanctuary jurisdictions. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said in the August announcement that the department would 'continue bringing litigation against sanctuary jurisdictions and work closely with the Department of Homeland Security to eradicate these harmful policies around the country.' As of Monday afternoon attorneys general from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin — all Democrats — had signed on to the lawsuit.
New York Post
a few seconds ago
- New York Post
Putin claims Ukraine should give up Donetsk because Russia will conquer region by October —despite a decade of failing to do so
Russian leader Vladimir Putin reportedly told President Trump his forces could conquer the long-sought-after Donetsk region by October if Ukraine didn't give up the land as part of a peace deal — but Kyiv and US observers point out that the Kremlin has failed to take it for more than a decade. While intelligence varies on Russia's advancements along the frontlines, one US assessment agrees that Putin could succeed in conquering the remaining 30% of Donetsk that he does not control by October, Axios reported. Experts at the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), a Washington-based think tank that has tracked the granular progress of the war since its start, however, point out that Russia has been unable to seize the region through three and a half years of bloody war — and 11 years of Kremlin-backed rebellion before that. 6 Russian President Vladimir Putin reportedly told President Trump at the Alaska summit last week that he will be able to capture Ukraine's Donetsk region by October. POOL/AFP via Getty Images And there's no reason Moscow will suddenly break through Ukraine's most heavily fortified frontline. 'Even if we're being generous to the Russians and say they can maintain their current advance, which we know they can't keep up and have been pushed back from… It would take about 475 days for Russia to take the entirety of Donetsk, that's December 2026,' George Barros, the head of the ISW's Russia team, told the Post. 'And I think that's putting it generously. To say Moscow can take it by October seems hyperbolic.' Ukrainian sources who also spoke with The Post were incredulous about the alleged intelligence assessment that Kyiv could lose Donetsk. 'Donetsk by October? They've been saying that since February of '22,' an American serving in the Ukrainian Armed Services said. 6 A Ukrainian soldier giving an order to a captured Russian troop in the Donetsk region on Aug. 17, 2025. Getty Images Speaking with Trump in Alaska on Friday, Putin demanded Donetsk be handed to him as a condition for ending his full-scale invasion of Ukraine, along with demanding the Luhansk, Crimea, Zaporizhia and Kherson regions. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has scoffed at the proposal to give up land where his forces have fended off Russian soldiers who have outgunned and outnumbered the defenders. A source familiar with the talks described negotiations over the fate of Donetsk as 'the ball game.' 'Every issue is an ancillary issue, except Donetsk,' the source previously told The Post. 6 Ukrainians firing an anti-aircraft gun at Russian drones in the Donetsk region on Aug. 15, 2025. Getty Images Moscow has launched four notable campaigns over the last year to take the remainder of Donetsk, with each major operation failing and resulting in Russia's advancement of just over six miles, according to the ISW. The quagmire is emblematic in the Russian operation to take the town of Toretsk, which finally fell under Moscow's control on Aug. 1 after 14 months of fighting, with the Kremlin currently struggling to keep the 6.4 miles of land. 'Russia's big push is happening in the summer, which has always been the case, but come fall, with the muddy season, things are going to slow down again,' Barros noted. 'Russia won't be able to sustain this push.' 6 Putin demanded that Ukraine give up Donetsk as a condition for ending the invasion. Vyacheslav Prokofyev, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP Moscow faced a similar struggle in taking the city of Avdiivka, with a US military veteran, known by the callsign 'Jackie,' noting that Ukraine's defenses continue to defy the odds. 'It took the Russians from 2017 to 2024 to take Avdiivka,' Jakie, a spokesman with the 3rd Assault Battalion said. 'I fought in the Battle of Bahkmut where I counted eight Russian shells fired for every one Ukrainian response. 'And that was during the lulls, during enemy pushes they were shooting 15-to-1 and it still took them 10 months,' he added. 6 A man carrying his belongings out of a building hit by a Russian strike in Bilozerske in Ukraine's Donetsk region on Aug. 12, 2025. Photo by GENYA SAVILOV/AFP via Getty Images After claiming Avdiivka, Moscow set its sights on Pokrovsk, a logistical hub in eastern Ukraine that Russia claimed to be making advancements in last week along with Dobropillia. The city, however, continues to repel Russia's soldiers, with more than 400 Moscow troops killed after last week's push, according to Kyiv. Zelensky and his top commanders also noted that Kyiv still holds the strategic cities of Sloviansk and Kramators, which have served as a 'fortress belt' protecting Donbas, the land comprised of the Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts. 6 A house destroyed by Russian shelling in Donetsk seen on Aug. 18, 2025. REUTERS/Alexander Ermochenko 'They remain Ukraine's main strongholds in Donbas, and the enemy does not have sufficient forces to storm them,' Kyiv said in a statement. 'Russia's capture of the entire Donetsk region — including the cities of Sloviansk, Kramatorsk, Druzhkivka, Dobropillia, and others — by October is impossible given the scale of losses and the inability of Russian forces to advance at the required pace,' the officials added. Kyiv claims that Russia is suffering 1,200 casualties per day, matching estimates from western officials and think tanks, with the US veteran Jackie saying that Ukrainian soldiers will continue to fight to the last man to keep the invaders out of Donbas. 'If you think Ukrainians are going to give up Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, I suggest asking a Texan if Davy Crockett should have given up the Alamo,' the American said. Despite the Trump administration's latest suggestion that Ukraine will have to concede land to end the war, Kyiv maintains that territory not currently occupied by Russian soldiers is off the table. 'It's not acceptable, but we don't want to be the person who said 'no,' because for us, it's important to go forward [with the US],' a Kyiv official exclusively told The Post. 'We definitely, honestly, believe that just Trump can end this war.'
Buzz Feed
a few seconds ago
- Buzz Feed
President Zelensky Finally Clapped Back At That Rude Reporter Who Asked Him About His Suit
Remember this? More specifically, remember when a reporter asked Volodymyr Zelensky why he didn't wear a suit, and it turned into a whole thing? Zelensky replied, "I will wear a costume after this war will finish. Maybe something like yours, maybe something better, I don't know. We will see. Maybe something cheaper." People thought the whole thing was "deranged." Marco Rubio couldn't believe it either. And now, Zelensky is back at the White House along with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. People were wondering if Zelensky would wear a suit after that whole thing in February, and today we found out. He showed up wearing this: "First of all, President Zelesnky, you look fabulous in that suit. You look good," the reporter said. "I said the same thing," Trump said back. "I said the same thing. Isn't that nice? That's the same one that attacked you last time," Trump continued. That's when the reporter says, "I apologize to you. You look wonderful." Zelensky had the last word on this one when he told the guy: "You're in the same suit. You see, I have changed. You have not." Then the whole room erupted in laughter. As this person said, "Even Trump had to admit this was a great comeback."
