Hanging a Noose Can Get You Five Years

One of the cases in VA that influenced this law:
The only black man at a company found nooses, created by his white co-workers, all around the office for an extended period of time. I'm not sure that there was a credible threat of actual murder, I don't think there was, but it was systematic intimidation and threat.

When he tried to prosecute, the law only recognized the crime as a misdemeanor. The lawyers tried to creatively classify the offense under stalking or other felonies, but could only prosecute it as a misdemeanor.

So clearly, this new law in VA is not redundant. Should such behavior be considered a felony? I think the case above should. To deliberately and systematically threaten someone in their home or workplace is a serious thing. Yes, threats other than nooses are serious as well, but at this point in our history, laws are written to solve problems we have. Around the country, noose threats have been increasing, and in many states, VA included, the courts did not have the tools to prosecute them as felonies.

Remember that the 5 years is a maximum sentence. Without this new law, the above intimidation can happen and be clearly documented without the perpetrator spending a single night in jail.
 
Meh, not sure why I should care, now that I think of it.

Because of my perceived race, I have the privilege of ignoring the whole issue, if I like.
 
Cavemonster said:
One of the cases in VA that influenced this law:
The only black man at a company found nooses, created by his white co-workers, all around the office for an extended period of time. I'm not sure that there was a credible threat of actual murder, I don't think there was, but it was systematic intimidation and threat.

When he tried to prosecute, the law only recognized the crime as a misdemeanor. The lawyers tried to creatively classify the offense under stalking or other felonies, but could only prosecute it as a misdemeanor.

So clearly, this new law in VA is not redundant. Should such behavior be considered a felony? I think the case above should. To deliberately and systematically threaten someone in their home or workplace is a serious thing. Yes, threats other than nooses are serious as well, but at this point in our history, laws are written to solve problems we have. Around the country, noose threats have been increasing, and in many states, VA included, the courts did not have the tools to prosecute them as felonies.

Remember that the 5 years is a maximum sentence. Without this new law, the above intimidation can happen and be clearly documented without the perpetrator spending a single night in jail.
Click to expand...
********!
Ther is a federal law or two about "creation of a hostile workplace environment". I go to briefings at least once a year. If he had 1/2 way competent lawyers, he'd own the company now, without a stupid redundant law.
 
rwguinn said:
********!
Ther is a federal law or two about "creation of a hostile workplace environment". I go to briefings at least once a year. If he had 1/2 way competent lawyers, he'd own the company now, without a stupid redundant law.
Click to expand...

Those laws applies to the employer, not the actual employees leaving the nooses. If this behavior was targeted at a home or at a workplace by people who didn't work there, or in public spaces it is uncovered without the new law.
 
Cavemonster said:
Those laws applies to the employer, not the actual employees leaving the nooses. If this behavior was targeted at a home or at a workplace by people who didn't work there, or in public spaces it is uncovered without the new law.
Click to expand...
I believe that you are totally incorrect there.
 
rgwinn-
Those links only address the companies being held responsible financially. These appear to be civil suits, not criminal trials. Like I said before, I don't think there is a law to hold the perpetrators themselves responsible at more than a misdemeanor level.
 
gumboot said:
If this were true, shouldn't the law only make it a felony if the person displaying the noose and the person being intimidated belong to a different race?
Click to expand...

That's the reason but they probably thought they'd run afoul of bad press if they tried to make the law too racial. They probably figured it would get better publicity if they wrote the law generally. Also, you might have trouble defining "different race". For example, if a white man threatens a man who is 1/2 black or 1/4 or 1/8 or....

Edit: Side note, I'm not a huge fan of "hate crime" laws.
 
Last edited:
Cavemonster said:
One of the cases in VA that influenced this law:
The only black man at a company found nooses, created by his white co-workers, all around the office for an extended period of time. I'm not sure that there was a credible threat of actual murder, I don't think there was, but it was systematic intimidation and threat.

When he tried to prosecute, the law only recognized the crime as a misdemeanor. The lawyers tried to creatively classify the offense under stalking or other felonies, but could only prosecute it as a misdemeanor.

So clearly, this new law in VA is not redundant. Should such behavior be considered a felony? I think the case above should. To deliberately and systematically threaten someone in their home or workplace is a serious thing. Yes, threats other than nooses are serious as well, but at this point in our history, laws are written to solve problems we have. Around the country, noose threats have been increasing, and in many states, VA included, the courts did not have the tools to prosecute them as felonies.

Remember that the 5 years is a maximum sentence. Without this new law, the above intimidation can happen and be clearly documented without the perpetrator spending a single night in jail.
Click to expand...


Firstly, I think you should never, ever, ever make a law in response to a single incident.

Secondly, you should certainly never ever make a law that only addresses the specific details of a particular incident.

Is this really a major problem, as some of these articles imply?

Since September 2007, there have been 85 documented cases of noose hangings in the U.S., said Mark Potok of SPLC, who oversees the center's Intelligence Project.
Click to expand...

85 cases in a year. From a population of 300 million. Not exactly out of control, is it?

What about Virginia? Perhaps noose-threats are rampant?

In 2007, the SPLC found six documented hate incidents in Virginia, not including the noose cases in Rockingham County.

Two of those incidents occurred nearby. In June 2007, publications from the United Northern and Southern Knights of the Ku Klux Klan were distributed in two Charlottesville-area neighborhoods. And, in November, swastikas were spray-painted on cars and businesses in Waynesboro.
Click to expand...

Six hate incidents, in total. Six. Out of a population of almost 8 million. Less than 1 in a million. And the two cited are "hate crimes" barely even worth mentioning. Swastika graffiti? Distributing pamphlets?

Yeah, it's practically an epidemic. It clearly needs legislating against. :rolleyes:
 
Ah, that's the problem when you try to make a matter of fact into a matter of law.

It is a matter of fact, determined by the jury, whether hanging a noose on someone's property is a threat, when A is on trial for threathening B. To determine that, the jury surely would consider, inter alia, the race of both parties, since it is more likely for a white man to use a noose as a threat against a black man than for it to be used in a threat in other situations.

But once you try to make it a law, the law becomes either unnecessary or silly, since the law naturally cannot specify acts as more or less criminal based on the race of the victim or perpetrator.

P.S.

To give another example: recently there was a case in Israel when a Jew was convicted of threathening a Muslim because he put some pork (or something similar) on the victim's property. The fact that pig is despised by both Jews and Muslims was part of the evidence that led to the conviction.

But can you imagine how ridiculous a law saying, "any person who, without permission and with malice aforethought, puts ham, pork, or sausage on another's property, shall be liable for..." would look like?
 
Last edited:
gumboot said:
Firstly, I think you should never, ever, ever make a law in response to a single incident.

Secondly, you should certainly never ever make a law that only addresses the specific details of a particular incident.

Is this really a major problem, as some of these articles imply?



85 cases in a year. From a population of 300 million. Not exactly out of control, is it?

What about Virginia? Perhaps noose-threats are rampant?



Six hate incidents, in total. Six. Out of a population of almost 8 million. Less than 1 in a million. And the two cited are "hate crimes" barely even worth mentioning. Swastika graffiti? Distributing pamphlets?

Yeah, it's practically an epidemic. It clearly needs legislating against. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I don't think the big problem is the noose law, it is the lack of other more logical laws. It seems that you can verbally threaten someone for a while and get a relatively light punishment. The law in the OP fills a small crack when there is a huge gapeing chasm.
 
gumboot said:
I can verbally and explicitly threaten to kill someone, and I cannot be charged.
Click to expand...
No. A verbal death threat in VA is a misdemeanor, you can be charged.
I can brandish a knife and verbally and explicitly threaten to kill someone, and the most I am likely to face is something along the lines of brandishing a weapon - probably a fine or something.
Click to expand...
No. That's a class 1 misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail.
I can explicitly write down on paper that I intend to kill someone and give that paper to them, and the most I will face is a very short sentence.
Click to expand...
No. A written threat can be charged as a class 6 misdemeanor. The same punishment as the noose law.

Dude, why would you make statements about the laws in Virginia if you haven't looked them up?
 
KingMerv00 said:
I don't think the big problem is the noose law, it is the lack of other more logical laws. It seems that you can verbally threaten someone for a while and get a relatively light punishment. The law in the OP fills a small crack when there is a huge gapeing chasm.
Click to expand...

This is a reasonable criticism.
I agree that other threats are still unhandled by VA law that likely should.

In some very small towns, they only have traffic lights at intersections where people have died. It would be ideal if governments acted broadly to address qll possible future problems, but in reality they're mostly playing catch up. They address sqeaky wheels.
 
To give another example: recently there was a case in Israel when a Jew was convicted of threathening a Muslim because he put some pork (or something similar) on the victim's property. The fact that pig is despised by both Jews and Muslims was part of the evidence that led to the conviction.
Click to expand...

On second thought I see a business opportunity here. Free pork on one's yard might be cool, but why stop there? Declare you belong to a sect that (a) hates America, apple pie, and everything that's good and holy; (b) forbids you to touch caviar, good champagne, jewlery, and high-denomination dollar bills.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic said:
On second thought I see a business opportunity here. Free pork on one's yard might be cool, but why stop there? Declare you belong to a sect that (a) hates America, apple pie, and everything that's good and holy; (b) forbids you to touch caviar, good champagne, jewlery, and high-denomination dollar bills.
Click to expand...

Also, my people were slaughtered mercilessly by Nintendo Wiis. Leaving one on my porch would be terribly offensive.
 
gumboot said:
Can you reference the specific law?
Click to expand...

I can't find much on Westlaw for some reason. Using the search engine doesn't seem to help much so I'm stuck with picking through the statutes one at a time. I assume what I'm trying to find is here (There is no "general threats" section):

ARTICLE 6. EXTORTION AND OTHER THREATS
VA ST T. 18.2, Ch. 4, Art. 6, References and Annotations
s 18.2-59. Extortion of money, property or pecuniary benefit
s 18.2-60. Threats of death or bodily injury to a person or member of his family; threats to commit serious bodily harm to persons on school property; ...
s 18.2-60.1. Threatening the Governor or his immediate family
s 18.2-60.2. Members of the Governor's immediate family
s 18.2-60.3. Stalking; penalty
s 18.2-60.4. Violation of stalking protective orders; penalty
Click to expand...

Clicking on "s18.2-60" gives:

A. 1. Any person who knowingly communicates, in a writing, including an electronically transmitted communication producing a visual or electronic message, a threat to kill or do bodily injury to a person, regarding that person or any member of his family, and the threat places such person in reasonable apprehension of death or bodily injury to himself or his family member, is guilty of a Class 6 felony. However, any person who violates this subsection with the intent to commit an act of terrorism as defined in § 18.2-46.4 is guilty of a Class 5 felony.


2. Any person who communicates a threat, in a writing, including an electronically transmitted communication producing a visual or electronic message, to kill or do bodily harm, (i) on the grounds or premises of any elementary, middle or secondary school property, (ii) at any elementary, middle or secondary school-sponsored event or (iii) on a school bus to any person or persons, regardless of whether the person who is the object of the threat actually receives the threat, and the threat would place the person who is the object of the threat in reasonable apprehension of death or bodily harm, is guilty of a Class 6 felony.


B. Any person who orally makes a threat to any employee of any elementary, middle or secondary school, while on a school bus, on school property or at a school-sponsored activity, to kill or to do bodily injury to such person, is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.


A prosecution pursuant to this section may be either in the county, city or town in which the communication was made or received.
Click to expand...

Here is the "fighting words" statute:

Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-416


If any person shall, in the presence or hearing of another, curse or abuse such other person, or use any violent abusive language to such person concerning himself or any of his relations, or otherwise use such language, under circumstances reasonably calculated to provoke a breach of the peace, he shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor.
Click to expand...

There might be another statute in there somewhere but I'm not sure where.

Here is the free online version if anyone else wants to try.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom