Last edited by Dr_Patrick; 08-14-09 at 09:55 AM.
Under federal law, to be guilty of the crime of conspiracy, you must plan an illegal act with at least one other person & then must commit at least one Overt Act in furtherance of that conspiracy.
Me & a buddy discus robbing the local bank at dinner one night.
(this discussion itself is not a criminal act)
If either one of us then drive by the bank to check out security, we have then committed the overt act that then makes our activity a criminal conspiracy. (any lawyers out there who care to jump in here are welcome)
My point is that I would simpoly guess that this nut was let go because no overt act was committed. The Secret Service is on a hair trigger footing right now, & rightly so. I would guess thast they would prosecute ANYONE that they could reasonably expect to convict, regardless of his/her real threat potential.
Just a hunch on my part.
Last edited by Devil505; 08-14-09 at 10:04 AM.
How did I not "deal with it"?
First, I said he was a nutball who needed to be arrested. Do you disagree?
Then, I dealt with this:
2001-2008: Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
2009-2016: Dissent is the highest form of racism.
2017-? (Probably): Dissent is the highest form of misogyny.