Jedidiah Brown, Sheena James and the Leadership of Freedom Fighters unfortunate incident.

 

11391266_995337397173027_5247468632435086671_n

On Yesterday, we will directly address concerns of Jedidiah Brown on a Facebook “Live” feed with Sheena M. James and the leadership of their group including Lamon Reccord. Unfortunately, the group reacted in a manner that was not only slanderous but can be considered highly illegal. The team decided to read and air out public information that contained private and personal data (some of it flawed) that included Bishop Gregg L.Greer and family members. The statement that was made via live was to “Crush the head.”  Crush the head we would take the statement as a serious expression of an intention to inflict bodily harm or incitement of others to commit harm. 

Multiple statements have been collected by (Bishop Greer, family, and executive team) now this collection of personal threats on Bishop Greer’s life and the lives of family members calling for those associated to commit acts that are intended to harm. The report that was conducted is being examined as to “see” where Mr.Brown and Miss James did acquire such information-it is believed that a member of their group provided the information.

The incident last night proves that this group will go through any means to pursue their objective which on the outside has become in resemblance to “ganglike” activity. This group has consistently shown that it will use threats, slander, intimidation, and even potentially hurting others. 

Use of the internet to threaten “the person of another” constitutes a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 875 ( interstate communication of threat to injure) If it is communicated interstate, federal jurisdiction is created.

To constitute “a communication containing a threat” under Section 875(c), a communication must be such that a reasonable person (1) would take the statement as a serious expression of an intention to inflict bodily harm (the mens rea), and (2) would perceive such expression as being communicated to effect some change or achieve some goal through intimidation (the actus reus). A message is a “threat” if a reasonable recipient would tend to believe that the originator of the message was serious about his words and intended to effect the violence or other harm forewarned, regardless of the speaker’s actual motive for issuing the communication. 

Any person who willfully threatens to commit a crime which will result in death or great bodily injury to another person with the specific intent that the statement made verbally in writing or by means of an electronic communication device is to be taken as a threat even if there is no intent of actually carrying it out which on its face and under the circumstances in which it is made is so unequivocal unconditional immediate and specific as to convey to the person threatened a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat and thereby causes that person reasonably to be in sustained fear for his or her own safety or for his or her immediate family’s safety.

It is not necessary for the victim to actually be placed in fear of imminent serious bodily injury or for the accused to have the capability or the intention to actually carry out the threat. The offense is completed if the accused, by his threat, sought as a desired reaction, to place a person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury.

Freedom First International Executive Team and President Bishop Gregg L. Greer

Further Reference:

#####

(For National Distribution-Sent October 20, 2017)

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s