East Valley Tribune

February 12, 2012 | 01:46 am
East Valley Tribune Facebook East Valley Tribune Twitter East Valley Tribune Mobile Version East Valley Tribune Facebook

Court overturns conviction of E.V. man who planned Super Bowl massacre

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Monday, August 23, 2010 5:18 pm | Updated: 10:22 am, Wed Aug 25, 2010.

A federal appeals court has tossed out the conviction of a Tempe man who had planned a massacre at the 2008 Super Bowl in Glendale but then had a change of heart because of the way he addressed his threats before he mailed them.

In a split decision Monday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals noted that Kurt William Havelock was convicted of six counts of mailing threatening communications. That was based on letters he sent out detailing some of what he planned to do, ahead of his subsequently abandoned massacre.

But Judge William Canby Jr., writing for the majority, pointed out the law requires that a threat be "addressed to any other person and containing ... any threat to injure the person of the addressee or another." In this case, though, while Havelock was threatening to injure some people, he mailed four of his threats to media outlets and the other two to music-related websites.

Without an actual live "person" as the intended recipient of the mail, Canby said, there is no violation of the law.

That logic drew derision from appellate Judge Susan Graber.

She said that would mean someone who sent a letter to a business threatening "tomorrow I will come and shoot every one of you dead" could not be prosecuted. Similarly, Graber said, it would also bar bringing charges against someone who sent a white powder to the "University Center Mosque" with the message, "this will kill you all."

"The majority's interpretation produces absurd results," Graber wrote.

Canby, however, said it is necessary to follow the letter of the law.

According to court records and media reports, Havelock was angry for a variety of reasons, including that the Tempe City Council voted to recommend that he not be granted a liquor license.

On Super Bowl Sunday, Havelock put his new assault rifle and several clips of ammunition in his car and drove to a post office where he dropped the six envelopes into the "priority mail" slot. Canby described the contents as part "manifesto" and part details of what he planned to do.

For example, the judge said, Havelock wrote, "It will be swift and bloody. I will sacrifice your children upon the altar of your excess."

Havelock then drove to the stadium, saying later he planned to "wait for the opportunity to shoot people." He also expected to be killed by police.

But on arriving at the University of Phoenix stadium in Glendale he had a change of heart and called his father.

Together with his parents, they went to Tempe police who could not tell if any laws had been violated. But federal agents, who came to the police station and interviewed Havelock, filed charges.

After a trial, he was sentenced to 366 days in prison followed by 36 months probation.

Canby acknowledged that federal law does consider a corporation to be a "person" for certain reasons. But he said that can't apply here.

"It makes no sense to threaten ‘to injure the person' of a corporation," the judge wrote. "Accordingly, the threatening communication must be addressed to a natural person."

More about

More about

More about

  • Discuss

Welcome to the discussion.

3 comments:

  • teachingaz posted at 7:31 pm on Mon, Aug 23, 2010.

    teachingaz Posts: 5

    So lets get this straight, when the 9th cicuit wants to allow unlimited campaign finances for corrupt politicians, they claim businesses have the rights of a person and have freedom of speech and civil rights, but when some psycho sends death threats addressed to businesses they no lnnger count.

     
  • az2008 posted at 3:15 am on Tue, Aug 24, 2010.

    az2008 Posts: 160

    This is getting weird. Corporations are people, and it makes sense for them to exercise freedom of speech (lobby, donate to campaigns). But, it makes no sense to "threaten to injure" the person of a corporation?

    I guess it's open season on corporations. We can't out vote them. But, we can out gun them?

    Something tells me this is the notoriously liberal 9th Circuit's attempt to force the SC to reconsider its recent pro-corporation decision. I bet the 9th hopes their decision will be appealed. Or, that its precedent will feed into other lower-court decisions, eventually leading to a confrontation with the SC.

     
  • stan000 posted at 8:03 am on Tue, Aug 24, 2010.

    stan000 Posts: 65

    With this decision I see a lot of fun news stories coming up, send off a carefully written letter, get lots of attention. Make a lot of folks miserable, cost a pile of money.

    Bring in an English teacher as your expert witness in court to carefully parse your words and get out of jail because you "followed the law" exactly and aren't guilty of anything.

     

Rules of Conduct

Welcome!
|
Not you?||
LogoutMy Dashboard

Happening Now...