Mohammed 'on trial' for his next 'day of judgement'

[MajGenl.Meade]

Legal defense to what? Clearly those who riot are legally guilty for what they do, not the dear reverend.

Well I think you must be right because all the violence is outside the jurisdiction of US courts. But is it not a fact that if he did something in the USA which incited a crowd to riot and kill and maim he would be subject to criminal prosecution under some felony law - incitement to riot? Culpable homicide? Conspiracy to commit murder? I don't know. I just don't think that in a civilized country people can do this and get away with it.

Suppose he purposely incited people to attack homosexuals or blacks or eskimoes? Surely that must be illegal? It's a pity the World Court can't arrest him and toss him into a jail in.... say.... Pakistan or Indonesia. Just for a bit and then let him out on parole. Locally.

Meade

[Sue U]

In Florida, incitement to riot is a third-degree felony subject to punishment of up to 5 years in prison. Oh, and in looking up the Florida statute, I came across this urging exactly the same thing.

Although no specific elements of the offense are defined under the Florida statute, any prohibition would undoubtedly have to comport with the federal Constitutional requirement that the "speech" at issue be an incitement to imminent lawless action. Given the time and distance between the act and the result, I'm not sure he could be convicted on the facts here. But in this age of global media and mass communication it's an interesting question.

[quaddriver]

In Florida, incitement to riot is a third-degree felony subject to punishment of up to 5 years in prison. Oh, and in looking up the Florida statute, I came across this urging exactly the same thing.

Although no specific elements of the offense are defined under the Florida statute, any prohibition would undoubtedly have to comport with the federal Constitutional requirement that the "speech" at issue be an incitement to imminent lawless action. Given the time and distance between the act and the result, I'm not sure he could be convicted on the facts here. But in this age of global media and mass communication it's an interesting question.

yeah, inciting people to riot IN florida, not 5000 miles away....thats a wee bit of a stretch isnt it?

(besides no standard would ever be met, are we then to assume that if 'buying mayonaise' is a cause for riot so says rubato, if you do so in FL you are guilty? please)

[quaddriver]

An for my edification, who is equating the burning of a book to large scale murder?

you said in the previous post, and then again in the last you are not giving a pass on the moral issue. 2 sets of morals here, not related or even same species.

'specially when you are dealing with nutjobs who take the eye-4-eye thing seriously.

[Big RR]

Meade--I agree with Sue's assessment; the speech would have to be a direct incitement to imminent lawless action--here it would be difficult to say that does exist. I still maintain he has the legal right to burn the koran, but that he is morally responsible for the violence that results from it.

As for your point about gays (or any other group), it is not illegal to preach hatred, nor does someone legally have to watch what they say or do be another person might be annoyed or react violently. So it would be legal to say "we have to get rid of all these illegals who are using up our tax dollars and breed like flies, etc.". but not to yell "gp kill that group over there" or "burn down that house or church", even though the first statement might incite some idiotic people to act like jerks.

And FWIW,do you really think he deserves to be killed for his views, or was that just tongue in cheek (I hope the latter)?

[MajGenl.Meade]

It's a pity the World Court can't arrest him and toss him into a jail in.... say.... Pakistan or Indonesia. Just for a bit and then let him out on parole. Locally.

Death? Oh no I was just thinking it would be a wonderful opportunity for him to explain his desire for peace to all the moderate Islamists while enjoying the sights of Asia.

Maybe we could find him a buddy and send them on the Amazing Race. "Uh oh - roadblock Terry. Let's see, you must make your way to Kandahar and burn three Q'urans that will be handed to you by the local moderates. Then you'll get a one-way ticket to.... what's that word?"

Meade

[Sue U]

In Florida, incitement to riot is a third-degree felony subject to punishment of up to 5 years in prison. Oh, and in looking up the Florida statute, I came across this urging exactly the same thing.

Although no specific elements of the offense are defined under the Florida statute, any prohibition would undoubtedly have to comport with the federal Constitutional requirement that the "speech" at issue be an incitement to imminent lawless action. Given the time and distance between the act and the result, I'm not sure he could be convicted on the facts here. But in this age of global media and mass communication it's an interesting question.

yeah, inciting people to riot IN florida, not 5000 miles away....thats a wee bit of a stretch isnt it?

(besides no standard would ever be met, are we then to assume that if 'buying mayonaise' is a cause for riot so says rubato, if you do so in FL you are guilty? please)

The statute makes incitement the crime; it does not require that there even be a riot, let alone that it be in Florida. If someone stood at Florida's border with Georgia and incited a mob standing a few feet away on the Georgia side of the line, would he not be guilty? (BTW, in Georgia incitement to riot is only a misdemeanor.

FYI:

Fla Stat Title XLVI, s 870.01:

***

(2) All persons guilty of a riot, or of inciting or encouraging a riot, shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.


Georgia Code 16-11-31:

(a) A person who with intent to riot does an act or engages in conduct which urges, counsels, or advises others to riot, at a time and place and under circumstances which produce a clear and present danger of a riot, commits the offense of inciting to riot.

(b) Any person who violates subsection (a) of this Code section is guilty of a misdemeanor.

[quaddriver]

but what standard defines incitement? because someone says so? It would have to be judged by US law, not sharia law and book burning in the US would likely not be seen as valid incitement (read: my mayo example)

According to the same sharia law, gay sex in the US is incitement. We gonna start rounding up gays in key west?

[Big RR]

In Florida, incitement to riot is a third-degree felony subject to punishment of up to 5 years in prison. Oh, and in looking up the Florida statute, I came across this urging exactly the same thing.

Although no specific elements of the offense are defined under the Florida statute, any prohibition would undoubtedly have to comport with the federal Constitutional requirement that the "speech" at issue be an incitement to imminent lawless action. Given the time and distance between the act and the result, I'm not sure he could be convicted on the facts here. But in this age of global media and mass communication it's an interesting question.

yeah, inciting people to riot IN florida, not 5000 miles away....thats a wee bit of a stretch isnt it?

(besides no standard would ever be met, are we then to assume that if 'buying mayonaise' is a cause for riot so says rubato, if you do so in FL you are guilty? please)

The statute makes incitement the crime; it does not require that there even be a riot, let alone that it be in Florida. If someone stood at Florida's border with Georgia and incited a mob standing a few feet away on the Georgia side of the line, would he not be guilty? (BTW, in Georgia incitement to riot is only a misdemeanor.

FYI:

Fla Stat Title XLVI, s 870.01:

***

(2) All persons guilty of a riot, or of inciting or encouraging a riot, shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.


Georgia Code 16-11-31:

(a) A person who with intent to riot does an act or engages in conduct which urges, counsels, or advises others to riot, at a time and place and under circumstances which produce a clear and present danger of a riot, commits the offense of inciting to riot.

(b) Any person who violates subsection (a) of this Code section is guilty of a misdemeanor.

sue--I doubt the statute would be Constitutional if it were applied as broadly as you suggest might be; I think the incitement would have to be presenting a real and proximate danger. Otherwise, virtually any speech with which others could disagree (and might violently disagree) could be made illegal.

[Sue U]

Oh, I agree -- to be applied constitutionally, per Brandenburg v. Ohio, there would have to be conduct both 1) directed to inciting imminent lawless action and 2) likely to produce such action. But this test alone says nothing about time and distance or method of communication.

[Gob]

Meanwhile, in Wales...

BNP candidate Sion Owens faces 'Koran burn' charge

A BNP candidate for next month's Welsh assembly elections has been charged with a public order offence, after police were passed a video appearing to show him burning a copy of the Koran.

Sion Owens, 41, was named as a party candidate for the South Wales West regional list last week.

He is due to appear at Swansea magistrates' court on Monday.

A second BNP election candidate has been arrested in connection with the incident, and released on bail.

A BNP spokesperson said both would still be candidates in the assembly election on 5 May.

On Friday, police were given a video which appeared to show Mr Owens dousing a copy of the Koran with a highly flammable fluid, before setting it alight and watching it burn.

Later that day he and another of the party's candidates for the assembly election, Swansea East candidate Joanne Shannon, were arrested.

Mr Owens was charged on Saturday night. He is in custody in Swansea, and due to appear in court on Monday.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-sout ... s-13028793

[Crackpot]

It's interesting that except for one source the entire global media actually decided to ignore Jones' obvious publicity stunt.

[Gob]

This sounds a bit suss...

The case has been withdrawn against a BNP candidate for the Welsh assembly election who had been accused of being filmed burning a copy of the Koran.

Sion Owens, aged 41, was charged with a public order offence on Saturday.

When he appeared at Swansea Magistrates Court the Crown Prosecution Service said it was withdrawing the case against him.

But it said that investigations would continue and that "almost certainly other proceedings will ensue."

Mr Owens, from Bonymaen, Swansea, appeared in court from custody.

A BNP candidate for the South Wales West regional list, he was arrested on Friday evening when the force was passed a video recording showing a man burning the Koran.

He was charged on Saturday evening under the Public Order Act.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-13032513

[Gob]

Another one...

A former soldier has been sentenced to 70 days in prison for setting fire to a copy of Muslim holy book the Koran in the centre of Carlisle.

Andrew Ryan had previously admitted religiously aggravated harassment and theft of a Koran from a library.

The 32-year-old, of Summerhill, said he had been "shocked" watching a Muslim burning a poppy on Remembrance Day.

Shoppers and schoolchildren witnessed the burning, outside the old Town Hall, on 19 January.

Sitting at Carlisle Magistrates' Court, District Judge Gerald Chalk described it as a case of "theatrical bigotry".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-13119241