> Why not just charge him for making a threat to begin with? Most likely because what he said isn't actually criminal, or it would be difficult to convict. In

> Why not just charge him for making a threat to begin with? Most likely because what he said isn't actually criminal, or it would be difficult to convict. In the US generally threats have to be specific and reasonable (I'm assuming the relevant crime would be making terroristic threats). A reasonable person needs to conclude that the statement they made was a threat, and that the threat is credible. The actual post he made (from the article): The posts from "Dionysus" that sparked concern spoke of his desire to "conduct a little experiment," which he said would be dangerous and "draw a lot of heat" and could be "dangerous". Asked by another user what the result would be, he responded, "death", according to the court documents. I'm not an expert, but that doesn't strike me as being specific or reasonable. Especially when you consider he was saying this on a militia website, and not saying it to Amazon or an Amazon employee.