From: snow <snow@smoke.suba.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 11:12:15 +0800
To: Brian Davis <bdavis@thepoint.net>
Subject: Re: Husband/Wife jailed for saying Clinton Sucks
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960821225141.22767A-100000@mercury.thepoint.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.960822183458.170F-100000@smoke.suba.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Wed, 21 Aug 1996, Brian Davis wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Aug 1996, jim bell wrote:
> > At 02:47 PM 8/21/96 -0400, Brian Davis wrote:
> > >On Tue, 20 Aug 1996 Scottauge@aol.com wrote:
> > >> Rush Limbaugh reports:
> > >> That a husband and wife are being jailed for yelling to Clinton "You Suck".
> > Doesn't sound much like a "threat" to me.
> > > And the couple was arrestd for disorderly conduct by 
> > >Chicago police. 
> > It sounds to me like the Chicops were just showing their "loyalty" by 
> > sitting on somebody, not that they believed any real crime had been committed.
> Nope.  When police started to ask the couple questions, they began 
> screaming obscenities and generally causing a scene.  Chicago cops, being 
> what they are, are likely to arrest someone in that circumstance without 
> any prodding.  I'm not saying they should, but they will.

     1) Not that I have noticed. I get people around here screaming and carrying 
on 24/7, and the cops just drive by looking for teenage black kids that look 
suspicious.

     2) Funny that isn't what I got out of listening to eye witnesses on the radio.

     The woman started screaming at Herr Klinton, then the goons moved in and she 
got more agaited. Her husband told her to shut up and not say anything else until 
he got an attorney, so the SS arrested him as well. 

> > > Any possible federal charges for threatening a president 
> > >in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 871 await a determination of the 
> > >seriousness of the statement, in context with the wife's conduct, by 
> > >prosecutors.  I predict no action.
> > But it isn't even a "threat", regardless of how "serious" it was.   The "I 
> > hope you die"  part is, presumably, a statement of fact:  She did, indeed, 
> > hope he dies.  But I don't see how hoping this can be considered a threat, 
> > or even SAYING she's hoping this is, likewise.
> The statement must be considered in context with their conduct, but as I 
> said before, I predict no action.

     Bullshit. Herr Klinton & goons desend into a crowd that _doesn't_ know they
are coming, and he starts to "press the flesh" with startled people, and one of them
starts to scream at him, that is not a death threat (especially given the political 
nature of what she was screaming. If she had said something like "I am going to kick
your ass", that would be a threat.). 

> > Frankly, I'd rather have a president who didn't feel the need to be 
> > protected by thugs.
> That's because you like dead Presidents. 

     Funny, Miterand (sp?) used to wander around the streets of Paris with just one
or two body guards. 

     Besides, I like dead presidents. The more of them I have, the better.
 
     <cue Ice-T "All I love is Dope & Dead presidents...">

Petro, Christopher C.
petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow@smoke.suba.com