SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
After Anthony Elonis's wife left him, he began to write graphically violent rap lyrics and post them to his Facebook account. In several posts, he fantasized about murdering his estranged wife. Others contained violent thoughts about the workplace from which he had been fired, his former co-workers, and an FBI agent who had investigated the matter. In one post, he even talked about massacring a local kindergarten class.
The decision? Intent to threaten must be demonstrated in order to convict for the criminal offense of "transmission of threats in interstate commerce". The court did not rule on whether or not "recklessness" would be sufficient.
The 7-2 ruling reversed the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and "narrowed the circumstances under which individuals can be convicted of making criminal threats under federal law when they post statements on social media like Facebook."
On Monday, the Supreme Court handed Elonis a victory by overturning his conviction. At the same time, however, the Court declined his invitation to issue a broad ruling on First Amendment grounds. Instead, the majority took a minimalist approach, deciding no more than was absolutely necessary to dispose of the case before it.
Original Submission
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08 2015, @03:34PM
To be honest, this should never have even gone to court. If you haul this guy in, you can haul in ice-t (cop killer), slim shady(pretty much everything), wu-tang clan (ain't nuthin to fuck with).
The list goes on and on, apparently this guys "crime" is not having enough money to speak his mind.
Everyone involved in his prosecution must live in another reality, because in this one it's extremely a black and white free speech issue with no middle ground.
Maybe they can throw the cuffs on stephen king next.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08 2015, @03:49PM
To be honest, this should never have even gone to court. If you haul this guy in, you can haul in ice-t (cop killer), slim shady(pretty much everything), wu-tang clan (ain't nuthin to fuck with).
None of those people made references to explicit people in their lyrics. FBI agent interviews him and then he writes about wanting to kill "little agent lady." His wife gets a protective order and then he posts that a protective order isn't think enough to stop a bullet.
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Monday June 08 2015, @04:22PM
None of those people made references to explicit people in their lyrics.
Orly? Clearly you are not an Eminem fan.
http://www.metrolyrics.com/kim-lyrics-eminem.html [metrolyrics.com]
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08 2015, @04:31PM
Or self consistent. "Little agent lady" is not a specific person.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08 2015, @04:35PM
> Or self consistent. "Little agent lady" is not a specific person.
Given the context it absolutely was. People are more than just their names.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Ethanol-fueled on Monday June 08 2015, @06:54PM
Its difficult to take seriously any threats which involve the constant use of Bugs-Bunny sound-effects in the background, as Eminem's music does. Of course the only exceptions to the rule are songs when he's whining about his mommy issues, which make him a lot less scary. Eminem may be rapping about how many people he wants to kill but then again Elmer Fudd wanted to kill Bugs Bunny. There is much more frightening and credibly threatening music out there.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08 2015, @07:01PM
Plus Eminem and other rappers who are public figures and professional entertainers are very unlikely to be rapping about some crime that they actually intend to commit. Some nobody who works 9 to 5 in a normal job rapping about dismembering someone who they perceive as wronged them probably has a pretty good chance of intending to commit the act and/or the target of the rapping probably has a reasonable belief that they may be harmed. Comparing this to professional entertainers is a really bad and flawed comparison.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08 2015, @07:42PM
Some nobody who works 9 to 5 in a normal job rapping about dismembering someone who they perceive as wronged them probably has a pretty good chance of intending to commit the act and/or the target of the rapping probably has a reasonable belief that they may be harmed.
And you've determined that this is true for this specific individual how? The legal system deals with individuals, or should.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08 2015, @08:18PM
History and empirical evidence leads one to this. Of all the famous, professional rappers I can think of only Slick Rick who actually committed some crimes close to what he was rapping about. (Of course, there's Suge Knight, but he's a producer.) Cool C in the 90s killed a police officer, but he didn't rap about that. I remember some rapper named Murder C who ironically murdered a guy, but he wasn't famous or that successful. I digress. The major point is, a professional rapper's main goal is to make a living, entertaining. That often means painting a picture in order to entertain, much like an actor acts. Someone who works at bank or shoe store who isn't in the business of entertaining who raps about killing someone close to them may be attempting to entertain, but they're in dangerous territory, and they're infringing on the rights of someone else, unless you enjoy having someone you know well rapping about murdering you in awful ways.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08 2015, @06:56PM
Riiiiiiight. Are you obtuse or a lawyer?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08 2015, @07:10PM
> Orly? Clearly you are not an Eminem fan
You are definitely correct. And if he had sent a copy of those lyrics to his wife after a big fight or after she got a restraining order on him then that would be pretty clear proof of intent to threaten her. But as far as I can tell that didn't happen.