Lawyer: Fake Bomb Charge an Overreaction

Are you asking me? I don't see a question mark at the end of any sentence in your response. Hmmm.

That is a good point, but I don't think that shows intent just the same. Given that she felt she should say that to an employee, she probably should have put 2 + 2 together and taken off her shirt or turned it inside out.


<edit>

The wording of that law is a bit ambiguous. How can someone unknowingly show intent? That doesn't make sense.

 

Did the employee first state that it looked like a bomb and she replied that it was harmless?

 

Good point. I was just typing this.

 

She should have taken it off. Asking an employee means you believe it could be mistaken for something bad, you dont go into an airport with something like that without intent (or knowledge that it may_ to scare people.

I dont believe it was unknowing.

I dont know, the article only says she told an employee. I am sure the courts will address that.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070921/us_nm/usa_security_boston_dc_2

Nowhere in that article does it say she approached the counter and asked about the device. In fact, some articles I've read say the exact opposite, that the service agent at the desk inquired about the device. If she went to the desk and asked the employee about the device, I would say that shows intent and understanding that it could cause panic. But I've yet to see a report of that, and only seen things that have the encounter with the employee going the other way, which would support the argument she had no idea it would cause panic, and had no intent to do so.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/22/AR2007092200291.html

 

Again, that doesn't show that she volunteered that information before being questioned. Show me a source that indicates she offered that BEFORE she was questioned about it, and I'll admit there's intent. If she was asked about it and then responded that it was art, it changes the circumstances considerly, and makes intent very hard to prove.

 

But the thing about that statement is that the worker could of asked her about it, and she replied that it was art.

 

Yeah, I don't know if we'll get a good answer on that. Many reporters are known for misquoting or miswriting things. I think you're all right, that one fact is probably what will determine intent or not.

 

Only a court could do that, which is why I will trust the jury.