Incident Summary:
4/25/1970: Doughtry Long, a former associate dean of students at the University of Pennsylvania, was arrested for throwing two Molotov cocktails into the Office of Community Relations in the College Hall building at the Philadelphia, United States campus. There were no casualties and it is unknown whether the building sustained damages.
Overview
GTD ID:
197004250003
When:
1970-04-25
Country:
United States
Region:
North America
Province/administrative
region/u.s. state:
Pennsylvania
City:
Philadelphia
What
Attack Information
| Type of Attack () |
Facility/Infrastructure Attack |
| Successful Attack? () |
Yes |
Target Information ()
| Target Type: Educational Institution |
|---|
| Name of Entity |
University of Pennsylvania |
| Specific Description |
Office of Community Relations, College Hall |
| Nationality of Target |
United States |
Additional Information
| Hostages |
No |
| Ransom |
No |
| Property Damage |
Unknown |
| Extent of Property Damage |
Unknown |
| Value of Property Damage |
Unknown |
How
Weapon Information
| Type |
Sub-type |
| Incendiary |
Molotov Cocktail/Petrol Bomb |
| Weapon Details |
|---|
| Molotov Cocktails |
Additional Information
| Suicide Attack? | No |
| Part of Multiple Incident? | No |
| Criterion 1 () |
Yes |
| Criterion 2 () |
Yes |
| Criterion 3 () |
Yes |
| Additional Information |
Doughtry Long resigned from the University of Pennsylvania two weeks earlier over a dispute involving the distribution of funds to African American students. John Hardwick was question by the police about the attack, but never charged. |
Who
Perpetrator Group Information
| Group Name |
Claimed Responsibility |
| Left-Wing Militants |
No |
Perpetrator Statistics
| Number of Perpetrators |
1 |
| Number of Captured Perpetrators |
1 |
Casualty Information
| Total Number of Casualties |
0 Fatalities / 0 Injured |
| Total Number of Fatalities |
0 |
| Number of U.S. Fatalities |
0 |
| Number of Perpetrator Fatalities |
0 |
| Total Number of Injured |
0 |
| Number of U.S. Injured |
0 |
| Number of Perpetrators Injured |
0 |
Sources
Sources
| Committee on Government Operations United States Senate, "Riots, Civil, and Criminal Disorders," U.S. Government Printing Office, August 6, 1970. |
| "Ex-College Aide Is Charged In Series Of Fires," Baltimore Sun, April 27, 1970. |
| "Ex-Aide to Dean Accused of Setting Penn Campus Fires," New York Times, April 27, 1970. |
Criteria
Criteria 1
The act must be aimed at attaining a political, economic, religious, or social goal. In terms of economic goals, the exclusive pursuit of profit does not satisfy this criterion. It must involve the pursuit of more profound, systemic economic change.
Criterion 2
There must be evidence of an intention to coerce, intimidate, or convey some other message to a larger audience (or audiences) than the immediate victims. It is the act taken as a totality that is considered, irrespective if every individual involved in carrying out the act was aware of this intention. As long as any of the planners or decision-makers behind the attack intended to coerce, intimidate or publicize, the intentionality criterion is met.
Criterion 3
The action must be outside the context of legitimate warfare activities. That is, the act must be outside the parameters permitted by international humanitarian law (particularly the prohibition against deliberately targeting civilians or non-combatants.
Doubt Terrorism Proper
The existence of a "Yes" for "Doubt Terrorism Proper?" records reservation, in the eyes of GTD analysts, that the incident in question is truly terrorism. Such uncertainty, however, was not deemed to be sufficient to disqualify the incident from inclusion into the GTD. Furthermore, such a determination of doubt is subsequently coded by GTD analysts as conforming to one of four possible alternative designations: 1) Insurgency/Guerilla Action; 2) Internecine Conflict Action; 3) Mass Murder; or 4) Purely Criminal Act.
Alternate Designation
The determination of "yes" for "Doubt Terrorism Proper" by GTD analysts is coded as conforming to one of four possible alternative designations: 1) Insurgency/Guerilla Action; 2) Internecine Conflict Action; 3) Mass Murder; or 4) Purely Criminal Act.
Successful Attack
Success of a terrorist strike is defined according to the tangible effects of the attack. For example, in a typical successful bombing, the bomb detonates and destroys property and/or kills individuals, whereas an unsuccessful bombing is one in which the bomb is discovered and defused or detonates early and kills the perpetrators. Success is not judged in terms of the larger goals of the perpetrators. For example, a bomb that exploded in a building would be counted as a success even if it did not, for example, succeed in bringing the building down or inducing government repression.
Type of Attack
This field captures the general method of attack and often reflects the broad class of tactics used. It consists of the following nine categories:
- Assassination
- Armed Assault
- Unarmed Assault
- Bombing/Explosion
- Hijacking
- Hostage taking (Barricade Incident)
- Hostage taking (Kidnapping)
- Facility / Infrastructure Attack
- Unknown
Target Information
This field captures the general type of target. It consists of the following 22 categories:
- Abortion Related
- Airports & Airlines
- Business
- Government (General)
- Government (Diplomatic)
- Educational Institution
- Food or Water Supply
- Journalists & Media
- Maritime (includes Ports and Maritime facilities)
- Military
- NGO
- Other
- Police
- Private Citizens & Property
- Religious Figures/Institutions
- Telecommunication
- Terrorists
- Tourists
- Transportation (other than aviation)
- Unknown
- Utilities
- Violent Political Parties
Back to Search Results