From: "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" <hallam@ai.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 09:07:05 +0800
To: <gbroiles@netbox.com>
Subject: Re: Fw: Jim Bell Sentenced (fwd)
Message-ID: <01bd08f4$f74aaa70$06060606@russell>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain






>Phillip M. Hallam-Baker <hallam@ai.mit.edu> wrote:
>
>>FC folk may find this interesting. What Jim Bell was charged
>>with and admitted was planning and executing attacks on the
>>IRS.
>
>No, that's not correct. He was charged with (and plead guilty to)
>obstructing an IRS agent (26 USC 7212(a)) and misuse of a Social Security
>number (42 USC 408). The "attack" he admitted to executing consisted of
>applying a stinky chemical to the doormat of an IRS office. (see
><http://jya.com/jimbell-dock4.htm> for more.)


Actually I was entirely correct. He had already executed a
non-lethal attack and there was considerable evidence to
suggest he was planning something more lethal in future.


>>His 'Assasination Politics' essay was used to demonstrate
>>motive (amongst other things).
>
>That doesn't make any sense - it could conceivably have been introduced to
>demonstrate intent, or state of mind .. but not motive, at least in the

Read the essay, he quite clearly states his reason for wanting 
to see IRS agents murdered. 


>But it's misleading to say that the essay was used to "demonstrate"
>anything, as it was never introduced into evidence - there was no trial.

He plead guilty, to lesser charges. That does not mean he gets
the benefit of the doubt.

He was clearly a loon and quite probably would have killed 
someone sooner or later. 


            Phill