![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
sophia-sadek.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsRemember that guy who allegedly threatened a state senator in California? The email that he supposedly sent has been released. Some of the early impressions that I had deserve correction. For one thing, the email is not concerned with legislation banning a gun part. The threat refers to the banning of AR-15 rifles (the civilian counterpart of the military M-16). The threat had nothing to do with the explosives that the suspect had at his house. It was restricted to the use of a sniper rifle to kill the senator.
The release of the email was not accompanied by any information on how the authorities tied the email to the suspect. For all we know the connection could be a ruse to shake up Basham into cooperating with the authorities on other matters. It is also possible that Basham really did send the email but that the connection was obtained without the proper search authorization. For example, it could have been the result of NSA surveillance of domestic internet traffic. If so the authorities might use the threat of trial to extract a plea agreement from Basham. (It goes without saying that a plea agreement would relieve Basham of the prospect of serving a few years as a biker babe at the state's expense.)
Some of the blogosphere comments on the case are interesting. One individual claimed that Basham is psychotic because he supposedly claimed to be someone he was not. By that standard anyone who claims that someone is psychotic must be psychotic since they are professing to be qualified to make such an evaluation. Even a trained psychologist would refrain from judgement in such a situation since they have neither experience with the individual nor do they have proof that the email was actually sent by the suspect.
If it turns out that the state has a valid case against Basham, do you see him as a serious threat to the senator? What kind of plea agreement do you expect to result? Do you foresee Basham as being permanently denied the right to arm bears?
Links: Basham's hometown newspaper on the release of the email. A blog article on the story. Previous posting on Talk Politics.
The release of the email was not accompanied by any information on how the authorities tied the email to the suspect. For all we know the connection could be a ruse to shake up Basham into cooperating with the authorities on other matters. It is also possible that Basham really did send the email but that the connection was obtained without the proper search authorization. For example, it could have been the result of NSA surveillance of domestic internet traffic. If so the authorities might use the threat of trial to extract a plea agreement from Basham. (It goes without saying that a plea agreement would relieve Basham of the prospect of serving a few years as a biker babe at the state's expense.)
Some of the blogosphere comments on the case are interesting. One individual claimed that Basham is psychotic because he supposedly claimed to be someone he was not. By that standard anyone who claims that someone is psychotic must be psychotic since they are professing to be qualified to make such an evaluation. Even a trained psychologist would refrain from judgement in such a situation since they have neither experience with the individual nor do they have proof that the email was actually sent by the suspect.
If it turns out that the state has a valid case against Basham, do you see him as a serious threat to the senator? What kind of plea agreement do you expect to result? Do you foresee Basham as being permanently denied the right to arm bears?
Links: Basham's hometown newspaper on the release of the email. A blog article on the story. Previous posting on Talk Politics.
(no subject)
Date: 26/3/13 21:40 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/3/13 15:19 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 30/3/13 09:21 (UTC)