The government tightens it's grip around the throat of those who dare
question their agents actions.


A Brooklyn jury took less than two hours Friday to convict right-wing
loudmouth Harold (Hal) Turner of threatening to kill three Chicago
judges.
Turner's mom and teenage son gasped and sobbed as the jury found the
Internet shock jock guilty of a single charge of threatening to murder
the judges - a charge that carries up to 10 years in prison.
An ashen-faced Turner stripped off his tie and belt and handed his
wallet to a clerk before he was led out of the courtroom in downtown
Brooklyn.
"I love you, dad," his son, Michael Turner, 16, said after the verdict
was read.
Relatives of Turner angrily denounced the lightning-quick verdict,
which came on the fourth day of his second retrial.
Two previous trials ended in mistrials after jurors were unable to
agree on a verdict.
"There goes the First Amendment for everyone," said Kathy Diamond,
Turner's mother. "These judges, their job is to protect the
Constitution, not shred it.
She hugged her grandson who also insisted his father did nothing wrong.
"It's totally wrong," Michael Turner. "It's (his) opinion not a threat."
Jurors rushed out of the Brooklyn Heights courtroom without speaking to
reporters. No date was set for sentencing.
Prosecutors say the former radio host threatened federal judges Richard
Posner, William Bauer and Frank Easterbrook after they upheld Chicago's
ban on handguns.
"Let me be the first to say this plainly: these judges deserve to be
killed," Turner posted on his website in June 2009.
Turner, 48, of North Bergen, N.J., also posted the judges' phone
numbers and office addresses, federal prosecutor Diane MacArthur told
the jury.
The first two trials for Turner ended in deadlocked juries. The case
was heard in Brooklyn so Turner would not be on trial in the judges'
own courthouse.


Read mo
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_c...8-13_conservat
ive_internet_shock_jock_harold_hal_turner_convicte d_of_threatening_to_k.
html#ixzz0wn9QqZjO

--
Best Regards, Keith
http://home.comcast.net/~kilowattradio/
Tired of Google Groups? Free Usenet Access & Programs
http://home.comcast.net/~kilowattradio/usenet.html

On Aug 16, 1:43*pm, Keith wrote:


[...]


"Let me be the first to say this plainly: these judges deserve to be
killed," Turner posted on his website in June 2009.



I dunno, that sounds like merely an opinion to me. He never personally
threatened to kill the judges. But then again I guess when the
government considers itself to be a god, it can railroad anyone who
doesn't bow down before it.

DEFCON 88 wrote:
On Aug 16, 1:43 pm, wrote:


[...]


"Let me be the first to say this plainly: these judges deserve to be
killed," Turner posted on his website in June 2009.



I dunno, that sounds like merely an opinion to me. He never personally
threatened to kill the judges. But then again I guess when the
government considers itself to be a god, it can railroad anyone who
doesn't bow down before it.

He also published personal information. I think he'll win on appeal.
"You can beat the rap but you can't beat the ride"

We Have Met The Enemy And He Is Us ~ Pogo Possum.
cuhulin

wrote:
The government tightens it's grip around the throat of those who dare
question their agents actions.

"There goes the First Amendment for everyone," said Kathy Diamond,
Turner's mother.

I mean, if you can't threaten to kill a federal judge, who can you make
death threats to? Next they'll be telling us we can't threaten to rape our
girlfriends or blow up a building!! Why the hell can't I threaten to kill
a federal official? I pay their salary, doesn't that mean that I own them
and can end their lives or make their lives a living hell???

Sarcasm off

On Aug 16, 2:59*pm, (Drooling Idiot) wrote:
wrote:
The government tightens it's grip around the throat of those who dare
question their agents actions.

"There goes the First Amendment for everyone," said Kathy Diamond,
Turner's mother.

I mean, if you can't threaten to kill a federal judge, who can you make
death threats to? *Next they'll be telling us we can't threaten to rape our
girlfriends or blow up a building!! *Why the hell can't I threaten to kill
a federal official? *I pay their salary, doesn't that mean that I own them
and can end their lives or make their lives a living hell???

Sarcasm off


But he didn't threaten to kill them. He merely stated his opinion that
they should be killed for their unconstitutional ruling. He never
stated or implied that he himself wanted, or would even try, to kill
them. A big difference IMO.

DEFCON 88 wrote:
On Aug 16, 2:59 pm, (Drooling Idiot) wrote:
wrote:
The government tightens it's grip around the throat of those who dare
question their agents actions.
"There goes the First Amendment for everyone," said Kathy Diamond,
Turner's mother.
I mean, if you can't threaten to kill a federal judge, who can you make
death threats to? Next they'll be telling us we can't threaten to rape our
girlfriends or blow up a building!! Why the hell can't I threaten to kill
a federal official? I pay their salary, doesn't that mean that I own them
and can end their lives or make their lives a living hell???

Sarcasm off


But he didn't threaten to kill them. He merely stated his opinion that
they should be killed for their unconstitutional ruling. He never
stated or implied that he himself wanted, or would even try, to kill
them. A big difference IMO.

xxxx
To say they " deserve to be killed " over a ruling is to go off the end
of reasonable speech. And Federal Judges no less?
He advocated an act of violence against three officers of the court.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/advocate
Sorry, I see jail time for this blabber mouth.

On 8/16/10 15:10 , SMITH29 wrote:
DEFCON 88 wrote:
On Aug 16, 2:59 pm, (Drooling Idiot) wrote:
wrote:
The government tightens it's grip around the throat of those who dare
question their agents actions.
"There goes the First Amendment for everyone," said Kathy Diamond,
Turner's mother.
I mean, if you can't threaten to kill a federal judge, who can you make
death threats to? Next they'll be telling us we can't threaten to
rape our
girlfriends or blow up a building!! Why the hell can't I threaten to
kill
a federal official? I pay their salary, doesn't that mean that I own
them
and can end their lives or make their lives a living hell???

Sarcasm off


But he didn't threaten to kill them. He merely stated his opinion that
they should be killed for their unconstitutional ruling. He never
stated or implied that he himself wanted, or would even try, to kill
them. A big difference IMO.

xxxx
To say they " deserve to be killed " over a ruling is to go off the end
of reasonable speech. And Federal Judges no less?
He advocated an act of violence against three officers of the court.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/advocate
Sorry, I see jail time for this blabber mouth.



And just who gets to define the term 'reasonable.'

D. Peter Maus wrote:
On 8/16/10 15:10 , SMITH29 wrote:
DEFCON 88 wrote:
On Aug 16, 2:59 pm, (Drooling Idiot) wrote:
wrote:
The government tightens it's grip around the throat of those who dare
question their agents actions.
"There goes the First Amendment for everyone," said Kathy Diamond,
Turner's mother.
I mean, if you can't threaten to kill a federal judge, who can you make
death threats to? Next they'll be telling us we can't threaten to
rape our
girlfriends or blow up a building!! Why the hell can't I threaten to
kill
a federal official? I pay their salary, doesn't that mean that I own
them
and can end their lives or make their lives a living hell???

Sarcasm off


But he didn't threaten to kill them. He merely stated his opinion that
they should be killed for their unconstitutional ruling. He never
stated or implied that he himself wanted, or would even try, to kill
them. A big difference IMO.

xxxx
To say they " deserve to be killed " over a ruling is to go off the end
of reasonable speech. And Federal Judges no less?
He advocated an act of violence against three officers of the court.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/advocate
Sorry, I see jail time for this blabber mouth.



And just who gets to define the term 'reasonable.'

xxxx
And just who gets to decide who can decide who gets to make the
definition? This can go on and on and on to infinity.

In this case I decided I felt it was beyond reasonable speech and was an
advocation for violence against officers of the court.
You are supposed to say " Yes your honor and no your honor " and treat
them with respect to the court. Going beyond that protocol can be
hazardous to your freedom and your bank account.
It's basically just plain old common sense.

"D. Peter Maus" wrote:
On 8/16/10 15:10 , SMITH29 wrote:
DEFCON 88 wrote:
On Aug 16, 2:59 pm, (Drooling Idiot) wrote:
wrote:
The government tightens it's grip around the throat of those who
dare question their agents actions.
"There goes the First Amendment for everyone," said Kathy Diamond,
Turner's mother.
I mean, if you can't threaten to kill a federal judge, who can you
make death threats to? Next they'll be telling us we can't threaten
to rape our
girlfriends or blow up a building!! Why the hell can't I threaten to
kill
a federal official? I pay their salary, doesn't that mean that I own
them
and can end their lives or make their lives a living hell???

Sarcasm off


But he didn't threaten to kill them. He merely stated his opinion that
they should be killed for their unconstitutional ruling. He never
stated or implied that he himself wanted, or would even try, to kill
them. A big difference IMO.

xxxx
To say they " deserve to be killed " over a ruling is to go off the end
of reasonable speech. And Federal Judges no less?
He advocated an act of violence against three officers of the court.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/advocate
Sorry, I see jail time for this blabber mouth.

And just who gets to define the term 'reasonable.'

Apparently a jury.