When Todd threatened that school in 2018, it was an immanent threat

[admin]

Let’s be precise—because the law demands it.

1. I never threatened a school. The post in question was made on a site known for impersonation, and it was posted under my name while I was not online.
   • The site did not require login credentials, and
     
   • Posts continued in my name while I was incarcerated, which law enforcement confirmed.
     
   • The site’s host later confirmed I never accessed the platform.
     
2. Imminent threat requires immediacy and credibility.
   • The Supreme Court has ruled that speech must pose a real and immediate danger to justify bypassing investigation (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 1969).
     
   • In my case, the police acted on an anonymous tip that was never corroborated.
     
   • They arrested me without verifying the source, investigating the claim, or linking the threat to me in any meaningful way.
     
3. Photographs from 2008 do not establish present-day access to firearms.
   • The image used was stolen from a blog that had been offline for a decade.
     
   • I did not possess a valid FOID card, and no weapons were found during the search.
     
   • Using an old photo as justification for arrest is not probable cause—it’s prejudice.
     

The police had a duty to act lawfully—not instantly. They had a duty to investigate, corroborate, and verify before arresting someone and seizing property. They failed at every step. That’s not public safety—it’s constitutional failure.