Interest of Jacob J.B.
| Decision Date | 03 April 2001 |
| Docket Number | 00-3095 |
| Parties | This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. A party may file with the Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of Appeals. See Wis. Stat. §808.10 and Rule 809.62.STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT III In the Interest of Jacob J.B., a person Under the Age of 17: State of Wisconsin, Petitioner-Respondent, v. Jacob J.B., Respondent-Appellant |
| Court | Wisconsin Court of Appeals |
APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Buffalo County: ROBERT W. WING, Judge. Affirmed.
¶1.
1Jacob J.B. appeals from a juvenile dispositional order finding, after a non-jury trial, that he intentionally conveyed a bomb threat to the Alma School System, contrary to Wis. Stat. §947.015. The sole issue on appeal is whether the evidence is sufficient to support the finding that Jacob intentionally conveyed a bomb threat when he sent an e-mail message containing the single word "bomb" to the principal of the Alma High School. This court affirms the dispositional order.
¶2. The underlying facts are undisputed. While in his school library at Cochrane Fountain City High School, Jacob used the school computer to send three messages to the Alma High School. The first read, "barber shop." The second read, The third read, "bomb." It is this third message that is the basis for the juvenile delinquency charge.
¶3. While sending these first two messages, Jacob would show them to Eli, another student working at a computer next to Jacob. When Jacob asked Eli if he should send a bomb threat, Eli left the library without seeing whether Jacob sent the e-mail. Jacob admitted to sending the e-mail containing the word bomb to the Alma School. When the principal at the Alma High School received the message ten minutes before the school was about to close, he contacted the school superintendent. Although the students were released for the day at the normal time, all after-school activities were canceled. With the help of janitors and teachers, the police searched the school building. No bomb was found.
¶4. The crime of "bomb scare" is set forth in Wis. Stat. §947.0152 and contains three elements that the State had to prove. First, Jacob intentionally conveyed a threat or false information concerning an attempt or alleged attempt being made to destroy any property by means of explosives. Second, the threat or information was false. Third, Jacob knew that the threat or information was false. Jacob concedes the evidence supports the last two elements, but disputes whether the evidence was sufficient to show that he intended to convey a threat or information concerning an attempt to destroy property by means of explosives.
¶5. To ensure that individuals are not punished for constitutionally protected speech, courts have required that the communications must constitute a true threat. In State v. Perkins, 2000 WI App. 137, ¶12, 237 Wis. 2d 313, 614 N.W.2d 25, we held that the term "threat" means speech or conduct that objectively causes reasonable fear that the threatened purpose will be carried out. It does not mean idle or careless talk, jest or exaggerated political comment. In determining whether a reasonable person would interpret the communication as a serious expression of intent to inflict bodily harm, all relevant contextual circumstances must be considered. This would include the nature of the threat, the events surrounding the making of the threat, and the reaction of those to whom the threat is communicated. Id.
¶6. It is up to the trier of fact to determine under all the circumstances surrounding the communication whether Jacob's e-mail message represented a serious...
To continue reading
Request your trial