Insulting E-Mail to Ex-Lawyer Wasn’t Unprotected True Threat or Fighting Words
From JDT v. DMT, decided Wednesday by Michigan Court of Appeal Chief Judge Michael F. Gadola and Judges Thomas C. Cameron and Matthew S. Ackerman:
Respondent was placed on probation … after pleading no contest to two violations of a personal protection order (“PPO”) that prohibited him from contacting petitioner, his ex-wife. As a condition of his probation, respondent was barred from engaging in “any assaultive, abusive, threatening, or intimidating behavior.”
The instant probation violation stemmed from a series of e-mails respondent sent over the course of a month to attorney Wayne Crowe, who represented respondent in his divorce proceedings and the PPO proceeding. {According to respondent, the attorney-client relationship ended after Crowe resigned from his law firm without notifying respondent or moving to withdraw as respondent’s counsel.}
In the initial e-mails, which were sent only to Crowe, respondent referred to him as a “pussy” and a “negligent piece of shit,” accused Crowe of “ignor[ing] child abuse” and owing respondent money, and stated, “Fuck you.” In respondent’s subsequent e-mails, he copied various other people, including the county prosecutor, and referred to Crowe as a “fraud” and a “twat,” accused Crowe of breaking the law, and accused the presiding judge of ignoring evidence of child abuse and parental alienation.
Some of the e-mails included photos, such as a photo of the presiding judge and his family at a judicial investiture and another of respondent’s children, edited to appear as though they were in a jail cell. Crowe reported the emails to respondent’s probation officer, who filed a warrant request alleging a technical probation violation for respondent’s “threatening/intimidating behavior” toward Crowe.
At the probation violation hearing, Crowe testified that the e-mails made him fear for his safety. He also testified about several telephone calls in which respondent allegedly threatened him, although he could not recall the substance of those threats. After the presentation of evidence, respondent argued that the e-mails were constitutionall
Article from Reason.com
The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.
