Teen charged with felony for e-mails threatening Bush

Originally posted by angelsrforever
I agree with "Benevolent Heretic".
If any person was to lie about anything, yes it is wrong. But it becomes a legal matter if the lie was in court after the person was sworn in, lie to the police ect. My point is the difference between something being illegal, or simply wrong

I'm glad to see somebody was able to correctly interpret what I was saying.

Originally posted by DEEZNUTZ
Skip ahead a few years. This kid will have trouble getting into university, getting a job, etc because he made veiled threats to the "Almighty Bush" and others.

I think you may be right. And remember, he DIDN'T threaten the president. Or anyone as far as I can see:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Can anyone tell us what this kid did? NO! But everyone's so polarized and ready to come crashing down on anyone who would speak out against their precious president, or ever for rumors that he did something wrong, that the facts simply don't matter anymore.

And my concern is for what this says about us as a country and what we're doing to our children. This kid faces 5 years in PRISON and why? Because our country is SO "terroristic" minded, that we're putting our kids in prison if they speak out against something!

He may need attention, he may need some dicipline, he may need juvenile correction, and it's even possible the kid needs to go to prison, but NONE of us knows that, but yet some are willing to throw the book at him!

Deny ignorance, indeed! :shk:

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by DEEZNUTZ
Skip ahead a few years. This kid will have trouble getting into university, getting a job, etc because he made veiled threats to the "Almighty Bush" and others.

I doubt he'll have any trouble getting into "university". They are bastions of liberalism; hell, we even have an ex-Talabani spokesman attending Yale University.

I suppose in Canada you would just accept this as normal kid behavior.

No in Canada parents try to actually raise their own kids instead of letting the TV or computer doing it for them. They don't blame everybody else for their kids behavior. We don't think jail is the answer to everything.

A 13 year old will not be sentenced to "prison". Only those over 18, and those charged as an adult will be sentenced to prison. And i highly doubt this kid will be charged as an adult. He also shouldn't have any trouble getting into college because he will be 18 when he goes to college, and his record (if he gets one) will be exponged when he turns 18.

I believe they need to educate this kid on why it is illegal to threaten people, and what it's like inside a jail cell. If he spent 12 hours in a jail cell he would not want to go back in, ever.

On a side note.

Originally posted by ferretman2
The Secret Service will review and determine the proper punishment then prosecute.

Secret Servie do not "determine punishments" nor "prosecute". Nor does anyone determine punishment before they prosecute. The federal courts will be incharge of handling this case.

ok

where's this threatening e-mail

I'd like a look at it.

Is there a copy of it ANYWHERE public ?

forgive me if it was posted...I didn't have time to read all the posts

Most 13 year old boys won't know that threating someone is illegal. They know uttering a threat is wrong but probably thing it is just something that is frowned upon not illegal. I think they should just educate the children more about crimes.

my take:

if he sent an e-mail to his friend threatening bush, it would be okay...

but, he sent the e-mail to the mayor

what a dumb move...

The situation in the US right now reminds me of George Orwell's "1984". Big Brother is watching(NSA domestic spy program), don't speak up against the Admin(Valery Plame incident) because her husband spoke out against the evidence used to garner support for Iraq invasion. The list goes on, your right to peaceful assembly in public places has been stripped away because it's bad press for the president the list goes on and on. I like the US. I've been to almost every state in the country. However I haven't been there in the last 3 years because your government is ruining everything the US stands for and is well on it's way to a police state.

You the voting public have to wrench control of your country back into your hands. They work for you not the other way around. We have our problems up here with corruption in the government and so on but at least our officials know they are on a pretty tight leash. I see in US media that everybody is praising the election of Stephen Harper as Prime Minister because he's more like Bush. Well he may be, but he also knows that Canadians enjoy the distinction between our countries. It comes down to different ideologies between our countries. But the way things are going down in the US across the whole spectrum scares me. Canada may have a totalitarian neighbour soon.

Oh please man have some sense. If you came back ere after three years, you would notice nothing has changed. People are still congregating in public spaces, we are all working the same old jobs, granted gas has gotten a bit more expensive, but we still have our SUV's and we still throw garbage all over the place.

We still go to the clubs, shopping, to the park, school, gym, mall, theme parks and airport without having our retinas or fingerprints scanned. And as far as I know, every conversation you have ever had on the phone has been recorded by your phone company and stored in a database in some gaured warehouse/building. Regardless of what country you are from. All it takes is a demand from the government to get these conversations, regardless of what nation you live in.

America is the same damn place. The only difference I see is that racism, as much as it is being glorified in the media, is going down Of course racism on this board against Muslims seems to be at a record high, but the fact of the matter is, this kid should spend at least 21 days in a juvenile detention center just like I did.

Originally posted by Lady of the Lake
The way of the brave New World...

Apparently, being that you are from Australia, "the brave New World" must imply something beyond what you are seemingly referring to?

Regardless of the meaning, here in the US, if you threaten the life or threaten to harm the President of United States or any PUBLIC OFFICIAL, be assured that such will garner anyone some time before a judge, after being charged with a felony. Clearly, the teen has substantial medical difficulties and should be immediately given a psychiatric evaluation?

Just who in their right mind thinks they have the audacity and the right to threaten the life of or threaten to harm any PUBLIC servant, especially the head of a state/country, then once one is charged for doing so, another proclaims "The way of the brave New World..." in a derogatory manner? You have got to be kidding me, especially since some within this very topic seek to defend such a notion!





seekerof

[edit on 31-3-2006 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof
Just who in their right mind thinks they have the audacity and the right to threaten the life of or threaten to harm any PUBLIC servant, especially the head of a state/country, then once one is charged for doing so, another proclaims "The way of the brave New World..." in a derogatory manner? You have got to be kidding me, especially since some within this very topic seek to defend such a notion!

Oh, but he wasn't doing anything wrong - he was just "speaking out against something". /sarcasm

It's really sad to see that there are some who attempt to paint this issue with their broad brush of hatred for "our precious president".:shk:

[edit on 1-4-2006 by jsobecky]

Originally posted by Seekerof
Regardless of the meaning, here in the US, if you threaten the life or threaten to harm the President of United States or any PUBLIC OFFICIAL, be assured that such will garner anyone some time before a judge, after being charged with a felony.

He didn't threaten the President. Or were you just making a statement to Lady of the Lake?

Clearly, the teen has substantial medical difficulties and should be immediately given a psychiatric evaluation?

No. I do not think that's clear at all, seems how we havn't even read the letter...

Just who in their right mind thinks they have the audacity and the right to threaten the life of or threaten to harm any PUBLIC servant, especially the head of a state/country,...."The way of the brave New World..." in a derogatory manner? You have got to be kidding me, e

Well let's islotate the focal meaning of the word "threaten" as it pertains to this case. It's a relative term. What exactly did he say that was "threatening"? I think I will wait to read the letter before I formulate any conclusions.

I'm not trying to undermined the severity of the situation. Sending "threatening" emails to anyone should have consequences. If in fact he did so, it should be handled accordingly.

[rant] I think the question that really needs to be asked is what constitutes a "threat" and who gets to make that decision. The "PUBLIC OFFICIALS"? Deny Complacency.[/rant]

[edit on 033030p://1u03 by Lucid Lunacy]

Originally posted by Omniscient
I wouldn't necessarily jump to that conclusion. I think a 13 year old is very capable of that given he knows what he is doing

I certainly knew enough at 13 that I could have killed someone if I put my mind to it.

BTW, it's not hard to shoot a gun considering in Middle Eastern countries kids younger than 10 are well aware of how to use guns and prepared to fight.

Well I wouldn't go that far. Being prepared to use a gun, and shooting accurately, are two different things. Sure if you give a few kids guns it poses a threat, but it does take some practice to shoot a gun accurately.

Sure, Presidential security is important, but not to be made into an excuse to arrest anyone who stands against the President.

Leadership on this scale wouldn't be the same without at least a little tyranny

Originally posted by DEEZNUTZ
No in Canada parents try to actually raise their own kids instead of letting the TV or computer doing it for them. They don't blame everybody else for their kids behavior. We don't think jail is the answer to everything.

Well, in America we do the same thing. We try to raise our children the best way we know how.

There are only a few misguided people who blame the gov't and everyone else for the kid's actions. They worry about the effect on the kid more than they care about the kid's well-being. They are raising a generation of losers.

Originally posted by Seekerof
Apparently, being that you are from Australia, "the brave New World" must imply something beyond what you are seemingly referring to?

I am not sure what being from Australia has to do with it ? My comment referred to the completely over the top response we see time and time again to what would have once been considered pranks.

Note comments from various news media.....

"Investigators did not find anything in a search of the boy's home to make them think he was planning to carry out the alleged threats, police Capt Linny Cloyd said."

HOWEVER he is charged with a "terroristic threat " What the hell does THAT mean.

This might help, Lady of the Lake.

TERRORISTIC THREAT. (a) A person commits an offense if he threatens to commit any offense involving violence to any person or property with intent to: (1) cause a reaction of any type to his threat[0] by an official or volunteer agency organized to deal with emergencies; (2) place any person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury; (3) prevent or interrupt the occupation or use of a building; room; place of assembly; place to which the public has access; place of employment or occupation; aircraft, automobile, or other form of conveyance; or other public place; (4) cause impairment or interruption of public communications, public transportation, public water, gas, or power supply or other public service; (5) place the public or a substantial group of the public in fear of serious bodily injury; or (6) influence the conduct or activities of a branch or agency of the federal government, the state, or a political subdivision of the state.

Terroristic Threat Law and Legal Definition

Hope that helps.




seekerof

This is not the same world we once lived in. We are at war and warriors against 2.5 billion Muslims who want to kill and terrorize us.

This empowers people to overeact and assume everyone is a terrorist.

Can you imagine 2.5 billion muslims? if only 10% of them were terrorists and wanted our heads, they could overpower us in one day.

Yet, nothing.

So they charge teenagers for what used to be considered pranks. :shk:

Originally posted by dgtempe
We are at war and warriors against 2.5 billion Muslims who want to kill and terrorize us.

You say we are at war with 2.5 billion muslims? I thought we were at war against "terrorists". Are you implying 2.5 billion muslims are terrorists? Are you implying "muslim" is now synonymous with "terrorist"? I know that was always the dirty little secret...but you seem so open and casual about it.

Can you imagine 2.5 billion muslims? if only 10% of them were terrorists and wanted our heads, they could overpower us in one day.

250,000,000 right? I really don't think there is that many people directly affliated with the known terrorist regimes. I could very easily be wrong since this isn't my area of expertise.

Numbers do mean alot but you have to factor in technology too. I think it's unlikely even 250 million muslim-terrorists could destroy america.

[edit on 123030p://2u04 by Lucid Lunacy]

Originally posted by dgtempe
This is not the same world we once lived in. We are at war and warriors against 2.5 billion Muslims who want to kill and terrorize us.

This empowers people to overeact and assume everyone is a terrorist.

We are not at war with 2.5 billion Muslims and nor do 2.5 billion Muslims want to kill and terrorise us. In fact there are millions and millions of Muslims who just want to get on and lead their lives and let us get on with ours. Even if a few million Muslims wanted to kill us this does not give empowerment to anyone to over react and to assume that everyone is a terrorist. It is reactions such as this that those of us in what is left of our free world must speak out against and challenge before it is too late.

We're rapidly sliding off-topic here. To get back to the topic, this kid was thirteen years old. He should know right from wrong. He cannot be expected to know all of the consequences of his actions yet. That is where we as adults need to provide boundaries and guidelines for him, and to make him realize the seriousness of his "prank". That doesn't mean we need to impose the maximum penalty, but we need to make him aware of all the possible outcomes.

We can leave it up to his teenage buddies to blame the big bad gov't for coming down hard on those who threaten others. That bs still flies at that immature age.

[edit on 2-4-2006 by jsobecky]

My response was tongue in cheek.

The government would want us to think ALL muslims are to be feared.

Back to the teen, somebody has to tell him this is no longer a free society and he's not free to send emails with the "B" word or the "S" words when refering to el presidente.

:shk:

It was ok during Clinton, and every other president, but NOT THIS ONE.

This one is special.

[edit on 2-4-2006 by dgtempe] I noticed they didnt say what the threat was. It was probably something in the line of "Oh, is that nut coming here?" Hardly a threat.

What precisely was the threat???

[edit on 2-4-2006 by dgtempe]