Michigan's Terrorism Law used for students making threats

Below is a Viewpoint that I recently wrote regarding the use of Terrorism Laws against student threats. This is a ground breaking case that could pave the way for prosecutors to use this law in relation to school safety.

Check after the Viewpont for an update on Andrew's sentence.

Lansing State Journal

July 17, 2005

VIEWPOINT

Glenn R. Stutzky: State's terror law is abused

Andrew Osantowski, a Macomb county teenager, has become the first person convicted of "making a terrorist threat" under Michigan's 2002 state statute on terrorism.

The use of this law as a means for dealing with student threats is an unreasonable interpretation of what the law was written for and sets a dangerous precedent.

The terrorism statue was designed to assist law enforcement in dealing with adults who threaten to commit acts of terrorism and not for use against school-aged children.

Under this law, prosecutors do not have to prove that a student is actually capable of carrying out the threat or that they in fact intended to do it - but just that they said or wrote it.

Here is the problem: The terrorism law does not distinguish between a student "making" a threat and actually "posing" a threat.

The difference is huge.

Let's say I'm a student who has been e-mailing my friends about how I am going to build a nuclear bomb and turn the school into another Hiroshima.

Under the terrorism law, it does not matter that I do not actually possess the intellectual capability to design and build such a weapon.

Nor does it matter that I didn't really intent to do it.

I was extremely angry at the way I had been mistreated at school and, yes, I felt like "blowing them all up" in a huge nuclear fireball.

Without the need to prove capability or intent, all that is necessary to send me off to prison is to simply demonstrate that I said it or wrote about it.

If prosecutors adopt this approach, many more teenagers will be added to Michigan's already crowded prisons.

But how do we protect our schools from the possibility of one of these students actually making good on their threats, if not by arresting them and charging them with a felony terrorist count?

One school has found a way.

Oakland Schools has developed "Guidelines for Assessing Threatening Dangerous Behaviors in Schools", a systematic and comprehensive process to assess threats made by students and a means to address dangerous behaviors through an integrated intervention plan.

The intervention begins immediately and ultimately involves the student, family, school and community. Every threat is taken serious and initiates a process that results in a determination of the level of concern that exists - strong, moderate, or minimal and has a clear threshold of when to contact and involve the police.

Law enforcement benefits from GATDBS by not having to immediately come out to a school every time a threat is spoken, e-mailed, or written on a bathroom wall.

Did Andrew Osantowski really "pose" a threat?

That may not be the best question; a better one might be: "Where was he along the continuum between just blowing off steam and actually taking action?"

Michigan has the chance to pioneer a reasonable approach to assessing threats made by students and contribute to making our schools safer instead of our prisons fuller.

Let's do it!

Update - Andrew was sentenced to 4 1/2 years in prison, with 10 months credit for time served. The sentence could have been 20 or more years.

We have a better way to deal with these situations, we should use it.

If not the use of terrorism laws against threats made by students will increase.

Glenn's Blog

Coming soon.