Posted on 06/25/2009 5:05:50 PM PDT by Larry381
CHICAGO—Hal Turner, an intermittent internet radio talk show host and blogger, was arrested today by FBI agents at his home in North Bergen, N.J., on a federal complaint filed in Chicago alleging that he made internet postings threatening to assault and murder three federal appeals court judges in Chicago in retaliation for their recent ruling upholding handgun bans in Chicago and a suburb.
Internet postings on June 2 and 3 proclaimed “outrage” over the June 2, 2009, handgun decision by Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook and Judges Richard Posner and William Bauer, of the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, further stating, among other things: “Let me be the first to say this plainly: These Judges deserve to be killed.” The postings included photographs, phone numbers, work address and room numbers of these judges, along with a photo of the building in which they work and a map of its location.
Turner, 47, of North Bergen, N.J., was arrested this morning after FBI agents went to his residence to execute a search warrant. He was charged with threatening to assault and murder three federal judges with intent to retaliate against them for performing official duties in a criminal complaint filed today in U.S. District Court in Chicago. He is scheduled to have an initial court appearance at 12:30 p.m. tomorrow (Thursday) before U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael A. Shipp in U.S. District Court in Newark.
“We take threats to federal judges very seriously. Period,” said Patrick J. Fitzgerald, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, who announced the charges with Robert D. Grant, Special Agent in Charge of the Chicago Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey and the FBI Office in Newark are providing local assistance.
According to the complaint affidavit, several lawsuits were filed challenging handgun bans in Chicago and suburban Oak Park after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that the Second Amendment entitles handguns at home for self-protection. On June 2, 2009, the 7th Circuit issued an opinion in National Rifle Association v. Chicago, Nos. 08-4241, 08-4243 & 08-4244, affirming a district court’s decision to dismiss the cases challenging the local handgun bans. The unanimous decision was written by Chief Judge Easterbrook and joined by Judges Posner and Bauer.
On June 8, 2009, law enforcement agents were directed to postings on a web site. The front page of the site contained an entry dated June 2, 2009, that was titled: “OUTRAGE: Chicago Gun Ban UPHELD; Court says ‘Heller’ ruling by Supreme Court not applicable to states or municipalities!” After describing the decision, a lengthy entry followed, which is contained in the complaint affidavit. In addition to proclaiming “These judges deserve to be killed,” the entry notes that it was the same 7th Circuit Court of Appeals that decided the case of Matt Hale, a white-supremacist who was imprisoned after being convicted of soliciting the murder of a U.S. District Court judge in Chicago. The entry further noted that the same judge’s mother and husband were murdered by a gunman in her home. The posting then stated:
“Apparently, the 7th U.S. Circuit court didn’t get the hint after those killings. It appears another lesson is needed.”
The complaint charges that the posting was updated the next morning on June 3, 2009, with the following content:
“Judges official public work addresses and a map of the area are below. Their home addresses and maps will follow soon. Behold these devils.”
Below this headline, the entry listed the names, photos, phone numbers, work addresses and room numbers of the three judges involved in the handgun decision, as well as a photo of the Dirksen Federal Courthouse in Chicago and a map. The photo of the building had been modified to include arrows and a label referencing “Anti-truck bomb barriers,” according to the affidavit.
If convicted, threatening to assault or murder a federal judge carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. The court, however, would determine the appropriate sentence to be imposed under the advisory U.S. Sentencing Guidelines.
The government is being represented by Assistant U.S. Attorneys William Ridgway and William Hogan.
A little healthy fear would be a good thing for them I think.
Your letter carrier perhaps?
Pretty much all of them who aren't sworn military as far as I'm concerned.
L
That should give you plenty of time to escape to Paraguay.
Maybe he can make a movie about Obama getting shot like they did with Bush.
...Ambiguous at best...
Tell it to the judge. If you get indicted on federal charges, and he has only been arrested at this point, the odds are about 90% you will be convicted or cop a plea.
It's hard to get worked up over the safety of judges. If they carry out their jobs fairly, I doubt the extent of their danger is as real as you worry about.
The lowly store owner is a sitting target for armed robbers. And, they are getting robbed every day throughout the nation. They don't have security gates at entrances and they rarely have armed guards ready to put down threats. Yet, there are judges who enjoy these protections who would take away the store owners right to defend themselves. They ought to make judges spend a week of community service every year in the shoes of a store clerk.
Store keepers ALSO face danger from dissatisfied customers, but they face even more danger from professional criminals and drugged up thugs who regularly try to rob and kill them. That's why virtually all store owners have some sort of security system, and many have armed guards to protect the employees.
Still, judges preside over cases involving real criminals with long records and bad attitudes. Even when the judge does his or her job fairly and within the confines of the law, many of the criminals who go before them don't see it that way ~ particularly the psycho-sociopaths ~
Why is it I have a feeling you know a lot about that part?
As I recall the guy had many years left on his sentence so there seemed little need to extended it ~ maybe some other sort of discipline might have been more appropriate.
Still, the news story bothered me a lot because there was a prosecutor beating up on a guy who was already locked up, wasting resources that could have been used to go after someone wandering around outside who really did mean to hurt that judge.
Made me wonder what there was about that judge that possessed the prosecutor to waste time and money harrassing prisoners already in jail! Could be the judge's REAL enemy was right there in the courthouse with her.
Why is it I have a feeling you know a lot about that part? My take on the news is that armed robbers are routinely holding up store owners every day. Their security, a camera or a personal handgun. Also in the news every day are judges showing compassion to thugs and letting them go back into society. I can't see how they can be really worried when so many are so lenient. This is what I read in the news in spite of the snotty comment you made about me.
Hal Turner is kind of like Howard Stern.
You always wondr what he’s going to say next...
Sure, there are corrupt, stupid, thuggish judges who view their job as one of protecting criminals from the public they prey on, but they are in a distinct minority.
What is unfortunate is that we have 4 such judges on the Supreme Court, and if one of our more conservative types falls off the wagon they win.
Still, those criminals they're helping would just as gladly blow their brains out as they would anyone else's. Your typical criminal is never greatful to his or her benefactor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.