From: "L. McCarthy" <lmccarth@ducie.cs.umass.edu>
Rich Dutcher writes:
They *do* have to prove intent -- as to how, that's what juries are for. BTW, he used her real name in the post, with no disclaimers about fiction. From what I have heard, if he had said the same thing in her presence, he could have been arrested for assault.
Based on the NY Times article I've read, you're omitting some important extenuating circumstances here. For one thing, it was apparently posted to alt.sex.stories, which seems to obviate the use of "fictional" disclaimers. Furthermore, he did _not_ identify her as a UMich student.
Well, I was quoting a small AP story in a paper notorious for clipping articles short, so I knew that some [if not many] circumstances would be missing. In conversations today at Potlatch 4 I learned of other circumstances, albeit not necessarily what I would call "extenuating" ones. And the lawyers, of course, will be spin controlling from now until a verdict.
I don't see the relevance of "if he had said the same thing in her presence". He *didn't* ! There's an enormous difference between making a comment about a person to third parties, and making the comment to that person.
Not necessarily -- there's lots of case law that the threatened person need not be present to be threatened. The people present are still witnesses. I agree there's a difference, but its nature isn't obvious. Precisely what that difference is is up to judges, juries and [goddess help us!] legislators.
According to the NY Times story, the woman mentioned in the story only heard about it because reporters asked her about it ! I find a great deal of irony in the report that the controversy started because an alt.sex.stories reader in _Moscow_ tipped off the UMich authorities.
Irony noted and appreciated -- but it does illustrate the "public" nature of the forum.
It appears that the Russians are allowed to read erotic fiction, while the Americans are forbidden to read it, and get tossed in jail for writing it. We've come a long way, baby. Yeah.
-L. Futplex McCarthy
I was in high school while the Supremes [the real Supremes, with Earl Warren, not the bogus nostalgia group currently wearing the black robes] were doing the decisions that allowed Joyce and Lawrence to be sold in bookstores, and I was taught Shakespeare from a bowlderized edition of Romeo & Juliet. Trust me, we aren't in a place remotely like that now [not that there aren't plenty of people trying to get back there]. Which is not to say I'm complacent -- when I have money to spare from Green work, it goes to the ACLU. Eternal vigilance and all that. And this dude is entitled to presumption of innocence, a jury trial, and all the other paraphenalia of procedural liberty. However, given the information available to date, I see no reason to believe that he's been busted for writing "erotic fiction" rather than threatening a woman. Violence against women is too real, and in other contexts courts have held to a standard of what a "reasonable woman" might fear. BTW, does alt.sex.stories presume fiction, or is it pretend truth like the readers' sex stories in Penthouse?