Baltimore County Circuit Court finds e-mailer guilty of threatening

Daily Record, The (Baltimore), Oct 21, 2008 by Danny Jacobs

Walter C. Abbott Jr. was found guilty Monday in Baltimore County Circuit Court of threatening in an e-mail to "strangle the life" out of Martin O'Malley because of the governor's views on immigration.

While Abbott may have expressed remorse in court for his choice of words, afterward he stood by the reason behind his missive.

"Every day that man is in office he's a threat to America's jobs and well-being," Abbott said.

After a two-hour trial in which Abbott was barred from raising a

First Amendment defense, the jury of 10 women and two men deliberated for an hour before convicting him of making a threat against a state official.

Judge Dana Mark Levitz gave Abbott, 44, a six-month suspended jail sentence, two years of unsupervised probation and a $500 fine, and ordered him to stay 500 feet away from O'Malley and his wife.

A spokeswoman from the governor's office had no comment.

Abbott e-mailed O'Malley through the governor's Web site March 18 after being told he would not be able to speak with O'Malley by phone. The Parkville resident, who owns a small construction company, had testified before the General Assembly a week earlier in support of stricter immigration laws."If I ever get close enough to [you], I will rap [sic] my hands around your neck and strangle the life out of you," the expletive-filled e-mail read in part.

Maryland State Police troopers arrived at Abbott's home hours later, and Abbott admitted he sent the e-mail because he was "frustrated with Governor O'Malley's political views," according to charging documents.

Abbott was arrested and originally held on $2 million bail. He was placed on home detention for two months before being released in May.

In charging documents and on the witness stand Monday, Abbott said he hoped his message would lead to a chance to speak with O'Malley about immigration.

"He's in charge of the state," Abbott said. "Step up to the plate, be a hero and stop illegals from taking our jobs."

Abbott maintained he did not want to harm the governor.

"It was a statement trying to talk to him," he said as a dozen family members and friends watched. "I guess I shouldn't have hit the 'Submit' button, but I did."

Arthur M. Frank, Abbott's lawyer, told jurors his client's "threat" was akin to a student threatening to kill a teacher who gave out too much homework.

"It's a figure of speech unfortunately uncommonly used by a lot of people," said Frank, who is based in Towson.

Prosecutor Leo Ryan Jr. spent roughly twice as much time -- eight minutes -- on his closing argument as he did in presenting his case, calling only the state trooper who wrote the charging documents to testify.

Ryan, the deputy state's attorney for Baltimore County, reminded jurors that prosecutors only had to prove Abbott made the threat, not that he intended or was capable of carrying it out.

While Ryan acknowledged there could be millions of people frustrated with the country's current political and economic conditions, Abbott "crossed the line" with his e-mail.

"No matter how real your frustration ... we expect you to adhere to the rule of law," he said.

Frank said following the trial he intended to file an appeal in part because Levitz granted Ryan's motion prohibiting Frank from using the First Amendment as a defense.

"One's right to freedom of speech and right to political expression is a defense in a case like this when his threat is preceded by his views on illegal immigration and the like," Frank said in court.

Ryan disagreed.

"When that communication steps out of a clear boundary, it's no longer constitutionally protected," he said.

Levitz reiterated Ryan's position that the jury was only deciding if Abbott had made a threat.

"He doesn't have a constitutional right to make a threat," Levitz said. "You can't argue the Constitution overrides the statute in this case."

Abbott requested the jury trial after rejecting a deal from prosecutors that would have given him probation before judgment followed by unsupervised probation.