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: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08 2015, @03:46PM
> Pre-internet, people did all kinds of violent fantasies on paper and talk about it, but none of it ever left the home.
And if it did leave the house, like in a letter sent to the victim or stuck under her car's windshield wiper, it then became a problem. The guy made these posts explicitly public.
Besides that, your entire analysis has nothing to do with the case. The case was not about whether the threats were private or public, it was about the standard required to decide if they are threats. The over-turned standard was one based on perception of the recipient, the court said that the standard must be intent.
However, this guy is not exonerated, his case has been remanded to a lower court to apply the intent standard. He's going to lose that case because his intent was pretty clear, the "oh its just rap lyrics" is a fig leaf that won't stand. It's no different from school-yard bully tactics of making a threat and then saying "only joking!"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 08 2015, @03:53PM
And if it did leave the house, like in a letter sent to the victim or stuck under her car's windshield wiper, it then became a problem. The guy made these posts explicitly public.
Which actually makes it more dangerous for him if anything ever happens to her.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Tuesday June 09 2015, @03:25PM
Yes, he made them public. Very unlike a letter sent to the victim or stuck under her car's windshield wiper. The latter is obviously a threat directed towards a specific person; the former is more likely just someone venting to their friends.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 09 2015, @05:49PM
> Very unlike a letter sent to the victim or stuck under her car's windshield wiper.
Not identical, but also not the same as "just venting to friends." Especially when the author knows that his wife is in the circle of people most likely to see the threats.
The very fact that he explicitly included disclaimers about just exercising his first ammenmdnet rights in the threats makes it quite clear he was trying to have his cake and eat it too since no one includes such a disclaimer in something they know isn't threatening.