[ET(end tyranny)]

Whether you have a prior conviction or not, a threat is a threat, or trying to encourage others to carry out a threat.

If you hire a hit man, you commit a crime even if the hit wasn't accomplished. Just because you didn't have a prior felony conviction, doesn't give you a pass. *just saying*

[perfect stranger]

What is your point? Nobody hired a hitman. It seems your disagreement is with that judge. Don't take it out on other Freepers.

[dpa5923]

Well, I agree with previous poster that the comments by the so-called preacher are not really threats.

I would also say the comments by the so-called comedian were not really threats as well.

It can be argued both were out of line, but I don’t really think, as they were reported, either were really threats.

Now with that said, a prior conviciton alone is not enough to allow for an arrest in this case, threat or not. However, the accused was on probation. This is the key. Appearently, the judge felt the comments written by the “preacher” were in violation of the probation and hence the arrest.

Since the “comedian” was not on probation at the time of her comments, she could not have violated her parole.

This is not a case of comparing two similiar threats. Rather this is a case of one individual potentially violatiing his probation.

The “preacher” was not arrest solely for the so-called threat; rather he was arrested for violating his probation.