Is this a threat?

[Britanian11]

I live in Pennsylvania, for reference. Anyway, about 8 months ago I was talking with my Chem teacher at Lunch as I usually do. She asked me, after discussing my comments that "A school slashing would be more creative than a school shooting", if there was anyone I wanted dead. I named an individual that I did not like, but not really wanted dead, because it was the first name to come to mind.

Well, to cut it short this eventually lead to me being put on probation for the charge of "terroristic threats", and I insist that I have not committed a crime and everyone except my probation officer seems to agree with me. I assume that those of you here know a little bit more about the law than I do, and you will find that I am being treated unfairly. In fact, I was talking to a girl who was also on probation and she told me she was there for "harassment" after "going on Facebook and threatening to kill another girl and her entire family."

I am 17, am of mixed ethnicity have no history of drugs or violence or anything criminal, I am a good student and am extremely intelligent. Have I committed a crime, or is the law being stretched as far as it can possibly be stretched for the sake of stretching it?

Thanks.

 

[Proserpina]

I live in Pennsylvania, for reference. Anyway, about 8 months ago I was talking with my Chem teacher at Lunch as I usually do. She asked me, after discussing my comments that "A school slashing would be more creative than a school shooting", if there was anyone I wanted dead. I named an individual that I did not like, but not really wanted dead, because it was the first name to come to mind.

Well, to cut it short this eventually lead to me being put on probation for the charge of "terroristic threats", and I insist that I have not committed a crime and everyone except my probation officer seems to agree with me. I assume that those of you here know a little bit more about the law than I do, and you will find that I am being treated unfairly. In fact, I was talking to a girl who was also on probation and she told me she was there for "harassment" after "going on Facebook and threatening to kill another girl and her entire family."

I am 17, am of mixed ethnicity have no history of drugs or violence or anything criminal, I am a good student and am extremely intelligent. Have I committed a crime, or is the law being stretched as far as it can possibly be stretched for the sake of stretching it?

Thanks.

The school did not, in my opinion, act out of order or against the law in this situation.

 

[sandyclaus]

I live in Pennsylvania, for reference. Anyway, about 8 months ago I was talking with my Chem teacher at Lunch as I usually do. She asked me, after discussing my comments that "A school slashing would be more creative than a school shooting", if there was anyone I wanted dead. I named an individual that I did not like, but not really wanted dead, because it was the first name to come to mind.

Well, to cut it short this eventually lead to me being put on probation for the charge of "terroristic threats", and I insist that I have not committed a crime and everyone except my probation officer seems to agree with me. I assume that those of you here know a little bit more about the law than I do, and you will find that I am being treated unfairly. In fact, I was talking to a girl who was also on probation and she told me she was there for "harassment" after "going on Facebook and threatening to kill another girl and her entire family."

I am 17, am of mixed ethnicity have no history of drugs or violence or anything criminal, I am a good student and am extremely intelligent. Have I committed a crime, or is the law being stretched as far as it can possibly be stretched for the sake of stretching it?

Thanks.

I suspect that you are leaving out a significant part of the story - the part where you actually MADE these threats. Even in this day and age, law enforcement does not prosecute someone for simply speaking their mind. With a charge of terroristic threats, they would have had to have SOME reason to believe that you intended to follow through with what you were talking about.

As such, I'm with Pro on this one. I don't think that you were treated unfairly at all. I think that you are simply trying to play innocent when, in fact, you were anything but innocent in the crime for which you received probation.

 

[Britanian11]

I suspect that you are leaving out a significant part of the story - the part where you actually MADE these threats. Even in this day and age, law enforcement does not prosecute someone for simply speaking their mind. With a charge of terroristic threats, they would have had to have SOME reason to believe that you intended to follow through with what you were talking about.

As such, I'm with Pro on this one. I don't think that you were treated unfairly at all. I think that you are simply trying to play innocent when, in fact, you were anything but innocent in the crime for which you received probation.

I'm sorry to tell you, but you would be wrong. I never made threats to said individual. Their only reason, as stated in the report, was as you said, speaking my mind. That is the basis of my defense, I was simply speaking my mind. And they would have no reason to believe I intended to follow up on these threats, considering I have no have contact with this person for over a year. So, they would prosecute me for speaking my mind.

I realize my word probably isn't enough to convince you, but regardless of what you believe, for the sake of the question, assume that I nothing happened beyond what I described in the first post.

 

[sandyclaus]

I'm sorry to tell you, but you would be wrong. I never made threats to said individual. Their only reason, as stated in the report, was as you said, speaking my mind. That is the basis of my defense, I was simply speaking my mind. And they would have no reason to believe I intended to follow up on these threats, considering I have no have contact with this person for over a year. So, they would prosecute me for speaking my mind.

Sorry, not buying that for one minute. Unless, of course, you pled guilty to the charge or you had a lousy attorney to represent you in the case.

The Pennsylvania Criminal Code defines Terroristic Threats at 18 PACE 2706. According to this section, you may be found guilty of Terroristic Threats if the District Attorney proves that you threatened to:

1. Commit a crime of violence intending to terrorize someone;
2. Cause the evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation; or
3. Cause serious public inconvenience.

It is important to note that the Pennsylvania Criminal Code does not require to you actually carry out 1, 2, or 3 above, but merely THREATEN to do 1, 2, or 3. These threats may be made by any means of communication, i.e. written, verbal, over the internet, email, fax, or any other electronic or physical means.

That means you didn't just say these things about the person in question. What you said was interpreted as a THREAT, with a very real possibility that your actions might actually be carried out if you were given the means and opportunity to do so.

 

[Britanian11]

I think it's important to note here that there was no trial. I was not found guilty of anything in a court of law. I was put on probation, and that was the end of it. Again, I figure that I'm not going to convince you of my innocence just with words. Here are some more facts to convince you, but truthfully, my goal here is not to convince you. I simply want opinions on the information I provided. What I said was fact, and I did not leave out some critical part of the story. Based on what you've said however, I am innocent and I should never have been placed on probation.

I stated, to a teacher who knows me well, after her asking if I "wanted someone dead" that I did. I can't be sure, because I think I sort of just left after that, but I'm actually pretty sure she asked if I would ever kill said person and I said no. Again, that might not have happened.

Sometime later, about a week, I was called to the principals office and they told me that I was being removed from school for "implied threats" which certainly does not exist.

I can only assume the family of the person I "wanted dead" pressed charges, and I was placed on probation. There was no trial, and neither the principal or my PO seemed to give a damn that I had not done anything wrong.

I have no history of violence, and therefore no reason for them to believe I would carry out these "threats", that were never made.

If you choose not to believe me, then feel free to do so, because I am telling the truth and it is your choice. So, I want to ask. Based on the information I gave and the assumption that I am telling the truth, do you believe I should have been placed on probation?

The ONLY other relevant information in this that might have given them the slightest reason to believe that I would carry out these threats is something earlier in the year. I write a novel, and until recently the main character was named after myself. In the first chapter, he encounters a man robbing a women in an alley at night. My character turns the robbers gun on him, shoots him and then proceeds to tell the girl she can show her gratitude by giving him all of her money, which she does.

One of the principals apparently was snooping through my files and found problem with this. She threatened to kick me out of school if I refused counseling, and I refused. Nothing happened, but I did have to meet with a psychiatrist afterwords. He was convinced that I was capable of acts of violence, really, just because I lack empathy. But that is hardly relevant considering the entire basis was that someone didn't like part of my novel.

 

[CdwJava]

I'm sorry to tell you, but you would be wrong. I never made threats to said individual.

The threats do not have to be made TO the individual, only about them.

Here is the code section:

§ 2706. Terroristic threats.
(a) Offense defined.--A person commits the crime of
terroristic threats if the person communicates, either directly
or indirectly, a threat to:
(1) commit any crime of violence with intent to
terrorize another;
(2) cause evacuation of a building, place of assembly or
facility of public transportation; or
(3) otherwise cause serious public inconvenience, or
cause terror or serious public inconvenience with reckless
disregard of the risk of causing such terror or
inconvenience.
(b) Restitution.--A person convicted of violating this
section shall, in addition to any other sentence imposed or
restitution ordered under 42 Pa.C.S. § 9721(c) (relating to
sentencing generally), be sentenced to pay restitution in an
amount equal to the cost of the evacuation, including, but not
limited to, fire and police response; emergency medical service
or emergency preparedness response; and transportation of an
individual from the building, place of assembly or facility.
(c) Preservation of private remedies.--No judgment or order
of restitution shall debar a person, by appropriate action, to
recover from the offender as otherwise provided by law, provided
that any civil award shall be reduced by the amount paid under
the criminal judgment.
(d) Grading.--An offense under subsection (a) constitutes a
misdemeanor of the first degree unless the threat causes the
occupants of the building, place of assembly or facility of
public transportation to be diverted from their normal or
customary operations, in which case the offense constitutes a
felony of the third degree.
(e) Definition.--As used in this section, the term
"communicates" means conveys in person or by written or
electronic means, including telephone, electronic mail,
Internet, facsimile, telex and similar transmissions.​

Since you got put on probation, obviously you were either convicted (or, in common juvenile parlance, a "true finding" was made) or you pled guilty. If you pled guilty, WHY did you plead guilty if you dd not do it? If convicted, then the state was clearly able to meet the burden of proof necessary to show that you communicated a believable threat against the person in question to the chem. teacher.

 

[CdwJava]

I think it's important to note here that there was no trial. I was not found guilty of anything in a court of law. I was put on probation, and that was the end of it.

Probation is a legal disposition made by a court. Either a court placed you on some form of supervision, or you agreed to some lesser form f supervision by the probation department in lieu of going to court, and they will be holding this matter over your head until the requisite time has passed.

Nothing happened, but I did have to meet with a psychiatrist afterwords. He was convinced that I was capable of acts of violence, really, just because I lack empathy.

The psychiatrist came to this conclusion? Did they diagnose you with some form of sociopathic disorder?

 

[nanu156]

You are a minor correct? Did your parents agree to a plea on your behalf?

 

[eerelations]

"A school slashing would be more creative than a school shooting" and "I would like to see X person dead" sound pretty threatening to me. Nice peaceful non-threatening people just don't talk like this.

 

[Banned_Princess]

I'm sure schools have 0 tolorance for this type of language. And a school is not a court of law, they do not have to "convict" you of anything.

 

[Britanian11]

"A school slashing would be more creative than a school shooting" and "I would like to see X person dead" sound pretty threatening to me. Nice peaceful non-threatening people just don't talk like this.

Well, considering I did you are wrong. A person can talk about whatever they want, that doesn't make them threatening simply because they did.

Now, to the rest of you. I never threatened him, all I did was say that I wanted him dead. That isn't a threat, and that's my problem here. That's all I said.

The psychiatrist came to this conclusion? Did they diagnose you with some form of sociopathic disorder?

No.

 

[Silverplum]

Take your brilliant self to Google and read:

Read about the failure of the English teacher at Columbine.

Read about the current desperate scramble to pass off blame for the psychiatrist treating James Holmes before the Aurora Theater shootings.

 

[Silverplum]

Read the law posted in your thread. You're the one who's incorrect.

Well, considering I did you are wrong. A person can talk about whatever they want, that doesn't make them threatening simply because they did.

Now, to the rest of you. I never threatened him, all I did was say that I wanted him dead. That isn't a threat, and that's my problem here. That's all I said.

No.

 

[Silverplum]

By definition, the principal was NOT "snooping" through your file. S/He was REVIEWING it, and has every right to do so.

Your snotty attitude and laughably inflated sense of entitlement is only part of your problem.

I think it's important to note here that there was no trial. I was not found guilty of anything in a court of law. I was put on probation, and that was the end of it. Again, I figure that I'm not going to convince you of my innocence just with words. Here are some more facts to convince you, but truthfully, my goal here is not to convince you. I simply want opinions on the information I provided. What I said was fact, and I did not leave out some critical part of the story. Based on what you've said however, I am innocent and I should never have been placed on probation.

I stated, to a teacher who knows me well, after her asking if I "wanted someone dead" that I did. I can't be sure, because I think I sort of just left after that, but I'm actually pretty sure she asked if I would ever kill said person and I said no. Again, that might not have happened.

Sometime later, about a week, I was called to the principals office and they told me that I was being removed from school for "implied threats" which certainly does not exist.

I can only assume the family of the person I "wanted dead" pressed charges, and I was placed on probation. There was no trial, and neither the principal or my PO seemed to give a damn that I had not done anything wrong.

I have no history of violence, and therefore no reason for them to believe I would carry out these "threats", that were never made.

If you choose not to believe me, then feel free to do so, because I am telling the truth and it is your choice. So, I want to ask. Based on the information I gave and the assumption that I am telling the truth, do you believe I should have been placed on probation?

The ONLY other relevant information in this that might have given them the slightest reason to believe that I would carry out these threats is something earlier in the year. I write a novel, and until recently the main character was named after myself. In the first chapter, he encounters a man robbing a women in an alley at night. My character turns the robbers gun on him, shoots him and then proceeds to tell the girl she can show her gratitude by giving him all of her money, which she does.

One of the principals apparently was snooping through my files and found problem with this. She threatened to kick me out of school if I refused counseling, and I refused. Nothing happened, but I did have to meet with a psychiatrist afterwords. He was convinced that I was capable of acts of violence, really, just because I lack empathy. But that is hardly relevant considering the entire basis was that someone didn't like part of my novel.