Margate man arrested after posting threat on MySpace

[xxxxx]

police wrote:

He should be punished to the fullest extent of the LAW...IDIOT

agree mhe should be punished, let's put him on i 95 cleaning up all the trash, for ay least 5 years, everyday

[cool guy]

hahahahahahhhaaaa......
ahahahhhaaaaahaaahhaaa....

Oh, it keeps getting better. Please, thugs, follow in his footsteps.

I could care less if his mother was Mother Teresa. It doesn't change who he is.

Oh, and by the way....we need to start suing criminals for the charges us normal people pay for housing their illegal and black arses.

[exdem]

smartie pants.....lol

[Hooper]

what's this story about anyways.

[Bamma Breeze]

A Firemans Sis wrote:

After viewing the video, I just have one question..........
What the h*e*l*l kind of drugs are he and his brother taking?
Put me on the jury. His a*s*s will FRY.
Society has NO place for morons such as him........
And who cares that his MOMMY goes to church. Big fat hairy deal.

A brain surgeon..No waite, He went to Harvard..MIT maybe.Or colgate Polytechectiu..:{P

[BeingReal]

Looo se rrrrrr

[Hooper]

i thought this was about a cop shooting a guy. man this sentinel thing is confusing.

[Flawless Logic]

not to worry wrote:

<quoted text>He was not exercising " free speech" he was committing a crime, it is called assault, he made verbal THREATS, not a political statement. The Supreme ruled that freedom of speech does not allow a person to yell " Fire" in a crowded movie theater. Your intentions are admirable but your logic is flawed. No this sick puppy needs to be put to sleep and stop wasting our oxygen, funny how they didn't arrest him at his " job"??

Verbal threats to whom?.........Any average attorney could beat these charges. Wait and see.

There is a difference between yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, where the results are immediate, and the "victims" are made to believe that a legitimate threat to their saftey exists.

However,

Posting an "open" threat on a forum such as "my space" would not constitute anything other than someone's need for attention at best.

The kid should be questioned to find out IF he was simply seeking attention, or if he actually intends to kill someone. A mental evaluation would be better than blindly charging him for something he MIGHT do.

I've heard that in Broward County they don't let common sense and lack of evidence get in the way of a good conviction.

[Mr Sparkle]

Flawless Logic wrote:

<quoted text>
Posting an "open" threat on a forum such as "my space" would not constitute anything other than someone's need for attention at best.

Really? Maybe you would like to explain that to all the family members of the 7 people killed in Japan earlier this week. Guy posted what he was going to do on the internet and then followed through.

"On Monday, investigators said that they were looking at a series of messages sent by mobile phone to a website that appeared to foretell the attack.

“I’ll crash my vehicle into people and if the vehicle becomes useless, I’ll get out a knife. Goodbye everyone!”, Japanese media reports quoted one posting early on Sunday morning as saying.

Subsequent messages appeared to chart the suspect’s journey from Shizuoka to Tokyo.

“No postponement because of rainy weather,” said a later message, Kyodo news agency reported.

Another posting, some 20 minutes before the attack, simply said:“It’s time,” Kyodo added."

http://www.japanprobe.com/...

Guess he just wanted "attention at best"

[Anon]

americanvet66 wrote:

anon? Isn't that a rehab center in
Los Angeles?

anon= annonymous and WASP= White Anglo-Saxon Protestant

[FLO RIDA SUX]

Just Curious wrote:

<quoted text>
Too bad you're not man enough to move out of your parents home.
You can go now, your mom is finished making you a snack.

Your not even smart enough to realize that its YOUR mothers house, and yes i do it so good she bakes me cookies.

[Bernard Goetz]

He's out on $10,000.00 bond. Probably on My Space as we speak. Loser!

[Flawless Logic]

Mr Sparkle wrote:

<quoted text>
Really? Maybe you would like to explain that to all the family members of the 7 people killed in Japan earlier this week. Guy posted what he was going to do on the internet and then followed through.
"On Monday, investigators said that they were looking at a series of messages sent by mobile phone to a website that appeared to foretell the attack.
“I’ll crash my vehicle into people and if the vehicle becomes useless, I’ll get out a knife. Goodbye everyone!”, Japanese media reports quoted one posting early on Sunday morning as saying.
Subsequent messages appeared to chart the suspect’s journey from Shizuoka to Tokyo.
“No postponement because of rainy weather,” said a later message, Kyodo news agency reported.
Another posting, some 20 minutes before the attack, simply said:“It’s time,” Kyodo added."
http://www.japanprobe.com/...
Guess he just wanted "attention at best"

?? And your post has WHAT to do with the cost of tea in Japan? If you would have read my post BEFORE you replied, you would know that I disagree with the guy being charged with a crime. He should have been evaluated and questioned, not arrested for basicly nothing. Same thing with the nip in Japan.

And yes, I would tell these 7 families the same thing.........."He was metally unstable, and he wanted attention at best".

You now have been corrected. Read before you post so you don't look like an idiot.

[LEO]

Flawless Logic wrote:

<quoted text>
Verbal threats to whom?.........Any average attorney could beat these charges. Wait and see.
There is a difference between yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, where the results are immediate, and the "victims" are made to believe that a legitimate threat to their saftey exists.
However,
Posting an "open" threat on a forum such as "my space" would not constitute anything other than someone's need for attention at best.
The kid should be questioned to find out IF he was simply seeking attention, or if he actually intends to kill someone. A mental evaluation would be better than blindly charging him for something he MIGHT do.
I've heard that in Broward County they don't let common sense and lack of evidence get in the way of a good conviction.

You have heard from who? The voices in your head? All the rib poking comments about Broward County and its legal system doesnt eliminate the fact that probable cause is needed for an arrest. This guy made a threat, apparently had the ability to carry out the threat (judging from the gun and attitude), and someone was in fear from the threat. In the state of Florida, he committed an aggravated assault. Wether or not his lawyer gets him off of the charge is meaningless. Hobbyist lawyers such as yourself would do well not to advise any of your friends with legal advice such as yours.

[FLO RIDA SUX]

LEO wrote:

<quoted text>
You have heard from who? The voices in your head? All the rib poking comments about Broward County and its legal system doesnt eliminate the fact that probable cause is needed for an arrest. This guy made a threat, apparently had the ability to carry out the threat (judging from the gun and attitude), and someone was in fear from the threat. In the state of Florida, he committed an aggravated assault. Wether or not his lawyer gets him off of the charge is meaningless. Hobbyist lawyers such as yourself would do well not to advise any of your friends with legal advice such as yours.

LEO....so that BSO who pointed a gun at his co worker shouldnt be arrested also?Im sure Coral Springs PD were shaking in there boots.The BSO actually physically pointed a gun and verbally threatend.But of course there is a double standard for LEO's.

[Andy Cash]

The Supreme Court long ago has cited 3 reasons why threats of violence are outside the 1st amendment; the most obvious and common sense reason being: TO PROTECT PERSONS FROM THE FEAR OF VIOLENCE...'nuff said.

NotStyro wrote:

Not to defend the arrested individual, but...
First Amendment, Bill of Rights, US Constitution...
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Well, what do you know, the founding fathers in their wisdom didn't write exceptions or clauses to the rights for free speech(expression).
Therefore any such law(s) regarding "written threats to kill and do bodily harm" would be unconstitutional and therefore invalid.
Leave 'pre-crime' to Hollywood and paperback fiction writers/publishers.