Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

Are_grits_groceries

(17,139 posts)
Fri Aug 16, 2013, 04:18 PM Aug 2013

Judge sides with abortion opponent over alleged threat:"Bomb threat is free speech" [View all]

WICHITA — An abortion opponent’s letter to a Wichita doctor saying someone might place an explosive under her car is constitutionally protected speech and not a “true threat” under existing law, a federal judge ruled Thursday.

U.S. District Judge J. Thomas Marten summarily found in favor of Angel Dillard in the 2011 civil lawsuit brought by the Justice Department under a law aimed at protecting access to abortion services. The 25-page decision handed down comes after a flurry of sealed filings seeking summary judgment.

The judge wrote that the government supplied no evidence that actual violence against Dr. Mila Means was likely or imminent.
<snip>
Dillard wrote in her letter that thousands of people from across the nation were scrutinizing Means’ background and would know “your habits and routines.”

“They know where you shop, who your friends are, what you drive, where you live,” the letter said. “You will be checking under your car every day <0x2014> because maybe today is the day someone places an explosive under it.”


The judge noted in his decision that Dillard sent the letter openly with her return address on it.
<snip>
The judge also rejected the government’s request for a permanent injunction prohibiting Dillard from again contacting Means. He was persuaded by the defense argument that she would have no reason to do so since Means no longer has any plans to offer abortion services in Kansas.

The court also noted the government’s argument that Means had refrained from contacting Means while the lawsuit was pending.

“If the glare of publicity and the prospect of additional government legal action are sufficient by themselves to prevent further communications by Dillard, they would remain even in the absence of separate injunction relief,” the judge wrote. “That is, the government effectively concedes that Dillard is a rational person, at least in sensing the folly of additional communications with Dr. Means.”
http://cjonline.com/news/2013-08-15/judge-sides-abortion-opponent-over-alleged-threat

The judge is as crazy as a s***house mouse.

32 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Uh, nowhere in this country except in that idiot's courtroom Warpy Aug 2013 #1
I would assume a similar statement about the judge's car would not be wise CBGLuthier Aug 2013 #2
i'd love to help you, ma'am Enrique Aug 2013 #3
A Clinton appointee, go figure.. n/t Fumesucker Aug 2013 #4
I was shocked when I saw that. niyad Aug 2013 #15
I'm not anymore Hydra Aug 2013 #22
Someone please post Dillard's info so we can spread it around the net with this story. PowerToThePeople Aug 2013 #5
Well, here's her photo so let's start there. That look.. I've seen that before... CurtEastPoint Aug 2013 #7
What's the Matter with Kansas PowerToThePeople Aug 2013 #9
YEAH VA_Jill Aug 2013 #19
And anybody can find her address here: lastlib Aug 2013 #25
That should have resulted in charges. Guess no one believes the inmate. That's conspiracy to commit. freshwest Aug 2013 #32
so that means dr. means can now send letters to ms. dillard that she okieinpain Aug 2013 #6
"Kansas" Fire Walk With Me Aug 2013 #8
This decision needs to be appealed. n/t kiranon Aug 2013 #10
Yes, judge just gave a green light to terrorism. freshwest Aug 2013 #31
This is a VERY dangerous precedent... Cooley Hurd Aug 2013 #11
What a hypocrite. Baitball Blogger Aug 2013 #12
That's insane. nt Robb Aug 2013 #13
It's clearly a threat of violence that if sent to a federal judge The Second Stone Aug 2013 #14
There was a case several years ago of a guy who posted a "threat" ET Awful Aug 2013 #16
because the threat is against an abortion provider, a WOMAN doctor, don't you know. niyad Aug 2013 #18
rec'ing for wider visibility. this judge, a CLINTON appointee, is clearly a reichwing stooge niyad Aug 2013 #17
OH YEAH???? cynzke Aug 2013 #20
Yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater is not protected speech KamaAina Aug 2013 #21
But only if you don't mention a pressure cooker. Spitfire of ATJ Aug 2013 #23
Now, if I go to Wichita Jack Rabbit Aug 2013 #24
So the fine Federal Judge has no problem with an actual/stochastic terrorist threat which is just indepat Aug 2013 #26
Tom Martin practiced law in my hometown for many years. 1KansasDem Aug 2013 #27
This is a hideously dangerous Jamastiene Aug 2013 #28
It wasn't a threat. Even considering its disgustingness, the language is protected. Gravitycollapse Aug 2013 #30
The judge actually made the correct decision. Gravitycollapse Aug 2013 #29
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Judge sides with abortion...