Whoa Nellie, put down those moderation powers I’m just trying to get views and hopefully answers.
Is there a law in the United States where discussing the assassination or planning on the harm of an American president is highly illegal? I know that kind of stuff is illegal when it comes to doing the same towards Joe Citizen but is there legislation that makes penalties tougher if the target happens to be the president.
I only ask because I saw one thing in another forum by a non-American and I remember when I was a kid and joked about this folks jumped down my throat saying I could go to jail even for joking about such a thing.
Actually, just threatening the life of the President, even if it’s a drunken barroom comment like, “I’d like to KILL that bastard President ______!” is illegal and can get you arrested and jailed. As a practical matter, I don’t think the law is enforced every time some drunk spouts off like that, but I do remember arrests of people for such threats.
Joking about it? No. If someone seriously felt that you were plotting it, you might have a problem - but then again, if there’s no proof other than hearsay, I’m not sure how you could be punished. But something like mailing a letter to the White House wherein you talk about assassination could get you in trouble for sure.
Well to be honest, if anyone thinks you seriously would attempt to assinate anyone you could be arrested. I do remember hearing though that talks about assinating any public official is a big no no.
If I read the OP correctly, she was inquiring, not if it were illegal to plan to kill the President, but if the fact that it was the President whose death was being encompassed made it a different, stronger criminal offense than, say, a plot to kill John Q. Citizen.
Apparently, from Ice Wolf’s link, there is a distinct crime. Any lawyers familiar enough with the U.S.C. to verify this?
Herr [color=“black”]Polycarp is correct in one respect. I was also questioning the legislation towards making offhanded remarks towards harming or killing an American president whether in “jest”, offhandedly or while intoxicated.[/color]
Well, in this case, “the district court added three points to Cole’s base offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3A1.2(a)” because “the victims were government officers–the letters threatened to kill the President of the United States and Senator Alfonse D’Amato.”
So, it would seem there is a special weighting when it comes to threatening government officials in the US.
Here’s a little quiz for you. You and Fred are sitting in a bar, and Fred says, “Hey, Marley. Guess what? I’m plotting to kill the President of the United States. And I plan to fund my operation with money from the bank robbery I committed yesterday.”
Question: does the hearsay rule prevent Fred’s words from being used against him as evidence?
I’m not sure. I imagine it would be enough to detain him if you thought he meant it and intended to do it. What the standards of proof are in a case like this I don’t know. Perhaps corroboration of others in the bar would make a difference. That’s probably a query for a lawyer.
The only time joking is considered a crime is specifically at security checkpoints at the airports. Wilt Chamberlain was detained for a period of time years ago for joking about a bomb on a team flight. Now, I recall having seen specific signs banning even joking (or mentioning) anything about bombs, etc.
Interestingly, when President Kennedy was assassinated, there was no federal law against murdering the president. Therefore it was handled by the Dallas Police and not the FBI. After that, of course, it became a federal offense.
President Ford may have the all time record for being a presidential target. On Sept. 5, 1975, “Squeaky” Fromme might have killed him but forgot to put a round in one of the chambers. 17 days later, Sara Jane Moore tried to shoot him. Both of them are in prison.
I aksed the question because your post seemed to suggest that somehow the hearsay rule would protect someone from punishment under those circumstances.
Since this is GQ, home of factual questions and answers, I just wanted to point out that the hearsay rule is no help to an accused in the situation I describe, since an admission against penal interest is an exception to the hearsay rule.
So “hearsay” wouldn’t stop you from testifying as to what Fred said, and Fred could be convicted of threatening the life of the President without any other testimony or evidence.
I mention this because your comment about hearsay seemed to foster an incorrect view.
