“We need to identify each juror. Then make them miserable. Maybe even suicidal,” wrote another user on the same forum. “1,000,000 men (armed) need to go to washington and hang everyone. That’s the only solution,” wrote another user. “This s— is out of control.”
“I hope every juror is doxxed and they pay for what they have done,” another user wrote on Trump’s Truth Social platform Thursday. “May God strike them dead. We will on November 5th and they will pay!”
Here is the problem: These people very carefully choose their words. It’s not illegal to “wish” all the jurors are outed, tortured, maimed, and drawn and quartered over a bed of coals- along with their families, neighbors and first grade teachers.
See that’s all okay to say apparently. This is our legal system. It’s not until they actually say, “I’m going to […],” that LE gets involved. Because none of that other stuff was a direct threat, or intended to incite violence, or intended to instill fear. They were just harmless wishes. Super okay, and nothing to worry about, you see?
Yes and no.
There are no “magic words” that make a threat legal. It’s always a question of context.
For example if Don Corleone came to your business and said “Nice place you got here, would be a shame if it burned down. By the way I happen to sell fire protection”, that would absolutely be illegal even though he never said he would do anything wrong. The intent is clear to all.
So it doesn’t really matter if someone says “I wish that guy was dead!” vs “I’m going to kill that guy!” Either one can be an illegal true threat, or not, depending on the context.
Well, would that be the same as someone coming on here saying “Nice federated place you got here, would be a shame if it went down. By the way, I happen to sell DDoS protection”?
It could be the same, for example if you are talking to Whiterose. It’s always a question of context.
Didn’t they arrest some little 4chan Nazi for saying he wanted to kill a cop in Minecraft? Turned out the trick didn’t work for him.