Intimidation: Here’s your clue

We know that the large majority of you nice folks reading this site and our paper are wonderful, intelligent people. You are what we refer to when we say “dear readers,” and we mean it when we say it.

However, there are still some idiots out there who read us for no reason other than so they can pick us apart.

For these clueless ones, we offer this primer on one of the many state statutes that defend our right to do what we’re doing.

This is the legal definition of “Intimidation” as set forth by Illinois law:

ILLINOIS COMPILED STATUTES 
CHAPTER 720.  CRIMINAL OFFENSES 
ACT 5. CRIMINAL CODE OF 1961

 § 12-6. Intimidation.

 (a) A person commits intimidation when, with intent to cause another to perform or to omit the performance of any act, he communicates to another, whether in person, by telephone or by mail, a threat to perform without lawful authority any of the following acts:

  (1) Inflict physical harm on the person threatened or any other person or on property;  or

  (2) Subject any person to physical confinement or restraint;  or

  (3) Commit any criminal offense;  or

  (4) Accuse any person of an offense;  or

  (5) Expose any person to hatred, contempt or ridicule;  or

  (6) Take action as a public official against anyone or anything, or withhold official action, or cause such action or withholding;  or

  (7) Bring about or continue a strike, boycott or other collective action.

 (b) Sentence.

 Intimidation is a Class 3 felony for which an offender may be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 2 years and not more than 10 years. 

End of statute.

You see, it’s illegal to just out and out state that a person has committed a crime, even something as ludicrous and non-existent as, oh…claiming someone “stole” a photo from a MySpace page in the course of reporting news. That’s not a crime, and we’ll get into that eventually, but not in this post.

This post is dedicated to what the definition of intimidation is, and how a person can’t just blatantly state that someone committed a crime, unless of course he’s a law enforcement officer or a prosecutor. That’s pretty simple, but some people are, well, more SIMPLE themselves. And those people need a bit of a clue in order to get along in life.

Here’s the clue: If we’re accused, in, say, an open forum, of a crime, we have legal recourse. That recourse is the law as stated above.

Please note the sentence if convicted of such a crime.

Please also note that it is illegal, under the ILCS definition of Intimidation, to call or visit our advertisers or vendors in an attempt to get them to stop advertising in or carrying our paper. Not only is it considered harassment and a violation of their own First Amendment rights to free speech, but if you tell them you won’t patronize their business because of their connection to us, or you will tell others not to, that’s known as a boycott. And boycotts are illegal in the state of Illinois. You can carry out a personal boycott all you want; you just can’t openly declare you’re doing it nor involve others to join with you in it.

Because harassment of a vendor is a crime toward the vendor, not toward us, it is incumbent upon the vendor to seek action against you if you do so. Because most people are just trying to make it in business these days, and it is expensive to litigate, they probably won’t. However, we have put forth our own monetary effort to help a vendor in the past who was being harassed by, of all people, a prosecutor. It didn’t turn out well for him. He’s now a judge, but only by the skin of his teeth…and he won’t dare say a cross word against our publication.

Note that this nice law is somewhat ‘iron-clad’–if a prosecutor refuses to prosecute someone who is alleged to have committed this crime, he, too, can be charged with Intimidation (paragraph 6).

We periodically run a PSA ad noting ‘Intimidation’ and what it is, just as a reminder. We haven’t run it in a while, because most people in our readership area have gotten the word. However, with the resurgence in sales we’ve seen this year, we have a whole new crop of readers, among whom are a handful of mouth-breathing fluoride drinkers who just don’t get it.

The rest of you dear readers, don’t fret. Things aren’t going to change; we will continue doing EVERYTHING we’ve been doing up to this point and more. The bullshit being shoveled our way by the unenlightened just lets us know that there are still people out there who shouldn’t breed; look at our president should you need any more proof.

The clueless, however?

Here’s your clue.

Response to a TWIT

Here’s the page 13 girl again…

Okay…and YOU’RE calling US dirty?

Readers! Observe young Kayliehoe’s “Mood”. Observe her message. Hell, mark her site, because you will see a revolving door reference to one guy after another, and how she “feels” about them, including “faking it every time I fucked you.” SHE’S EIGHTEEN, PEOPLE.

What a wonderful example of America’s youth today. No wonder we have what we have for a president.

This twisted twit doesn’t understand that she got in our pages because she got popped on an illegal consumption charge, NOT because of what she was or wasn’t wearing. She got in our pages a second time because she didn’t like it that her name was in print in our paper (the ONLY ONE IN THE AREA that bothered to print the two dozen kids that got busted, regardless of the fact that limp-wrist prosecutor David Hyde let all of them go)…not because of her puny little ugly-ass teats (or ugly-ass anything else…because really, she needs a paper bag for those MySpace pics. Oh, and do stay in the bathroom. Spare the public the pain.)

So here you are on the website, you deluded sex freak. You’ll not get in the paper again (unless you get busted again.) We don’t waste the ink on pieces of shit like you unless WE think it’s worth it…not what YOU think.

btw…is your dad Antonio Castro? That might explain a few things.

Call the whaaaaambulance!

Richland Co. response to April issue:

Well…

hm…

Okay. Whaaaambulance called.

And fwiw….

I’ve got more of a job than you’ll EVER have if you keep this shit up.

Slang doesn’t entail the abject mis-spelling of words.

When you allegedly break the law, that IS my business.

It’s as real as it’s gonna get, and apparently you don’t like it.

White County Henry haters SCREWED

This should be interesting.

Idiot posters on topix.net, revolving their whole lives and being around the effort to oust Grayville mayor Henry Kijonka, have recently pulled back on their venomous postings. They cite they ‘have to be careful what is said’ because Kijonka has threatened to sue them.

Now, he may be able to make good on that threat.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/02/texas-judge-orders-site-to-identify-anonymous-trolls-flamers.ars

We would imagine that would probably hold true for the White County Forum as well, a place where everyone can bitch and moan and say vile things about every member of Kijonka’s family, but god forbid the local errant deputies and police officers and their pervy ways get mentioned, then someone breaks out the scriptures.

You can’t have it both ways, haters. And now, you ‘anonymous’ haters may have to fess up.

If you wanted things kept anonymous, you should have started a newspaper. Did you really expect the ability to flame on the Internet to remain untampered with?

Newspapers are the only way to go.