That's not a surprise, but those cases have factors that this one does not have.
...and prosecutions are not convictions.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Golf Coach who tweeted to burn down Memories Pizza fired
- Thread starter terrehautian
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
That's not a surprise, but those cases have factors that this one does not have.
...and prosecutions are not convictions.
Forcing the word "tolerate" to meet any definition in any context is intolerant. Tolerance means what it means to whoever is using the word. That's the only way to be tolerant.
like? Teacher-student interaction? Should it not work in reverse?
it says that right at the bottom of the article. But, the "threat" also says this is not a threat. If it was a prank, they are really throwing the book at him. I don't see how "big things" is worse than "burning" a place down. Is an attempt to hide identity that much worse then expected anonymity?
You have ammo for us Canadians?? You know we shoot some weird stuff...
I've been to his shop. He must be a Canadian's enabler!
Significant difference #1- a threat communicated to the person the threat was about....necessary under the intimidation statute.
Assuming this was a threat, and I don't think it was, it was not communicated directly to Memories Pizza. It was tweeted to her followers and I have seen no evidence that Memories Pizza followed her. That takes this right out of an "intimidation" charge.
...but like I said, it was clearly hyperbole and not a threat. It was not even a prank impersonating a threat. It was a person venting and obviously that.
...but like I said, it was clearly hyperbole and not a threat. It was not even a prank impersonating a threat. It was a person venting and obviously that.
It was a stupid person venting into social media, and for that she has lost her coaching job. (She wasn't a teacher, she was a sport coach)
Which I think is ample recompense.
indiucky
Grandmaster
Can you and Kirk write a book..."Fancy Law Words for Hoosier Hillbillies" so as I can understand y'all better....
Oh, I've been told that....even before I was a lawyer......wait.
that and no one burned the place down, so.....
not as recompense
that was a fund drive set up by someone else.
if your house burns down and a fundraiser nets you a boatload of money, should your insurance company not have to pay?
(Somewhat bad analogy, but an analogy none the less)
Was she using the schools Twitter account?
How many followers does the account have?
I think the case could be made that she affected the business. The extent of the effect could be argued but not the effect itself.
especially if it was the school account.......settlement written all over that
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
Cameramonkeywww.thechosen.tv -
GodFearinGunTotinSuper Moderator -
d.kaufmanStill Here
Members online
- tca1352
- G_B_C
- latj
- Bowman78
- bogus
- StoneMilker
- ChristianPatriot
- gregkl
- Doug
- ditcherman
- AllenM
- fullauto 45
- Franc
- sloughfoot
- 7920drew
- bocefus78
- pokersamurai
- Mister K
- tsm
- Emerson Dambiggins
- wagyu52
- KJQ6945
- ftbstrd
- Wolfhound
- slims2002
- Cameramonkey
- gdun67
- mr.steve
- RangeJunkie
- nm0369
- JohnnyTre
- DoggyDaddy
- GodFearinGunTotin
- Timjoebillybob
- BrentG
- d.kaufman
- ChrisK
- sporter
- mike trible
- Dwight
- Sthunter987
- littletommy
- ancjr
- HCRMPD1
- djlaundry2000
- Keith_Indy
- Dog1
- Hassiebawked
- rhamersley
- shotgun131313