Therefore, courts are placed in the position of determining whether or not speech falls into the category of a true threat. "A true threat is a statement that a reasonable recipient would have interpreted as a serious expression of an intent to harm or cause injury to another." Doe v. Pulaski County Special School District, 306 F.3d 616, 626 (8th Cir. 2002). Furthermore, to determine whether speech is a threat, it is not necessary that the speaker intend to carry out the threat or be able to carry out the threat, but the speaker has to intentionally convey the threat to someone. Planned Parenthood of the Columbia/Willamette, Inc. v. Am. Coalition of Life Activists, 290 F.3d 1058, 1075 (9th Cir. 2002). Analysis: The case was not moot because the school district would be permitted to document the incident in its records if the Court reversed the trial court's decision.

The court determined that J.M. intended to communicate the contents of the letter. Though D.M. found the letter without J.M.'s assistance, J.M. allowed him...

Furthermore, J.M. testified that he was aware that D.M. would probably tell K.G. about the letter. Moreover, J.M. discussed the contents of the letter with K.G. The letter was clearly threatening because of its contemptuous language, J.M.'s repeated assertions that he wished to rape, sodomize, and kill K.G., and J.M.'s warnings that K.G. should not go to sleep because he would be waiting with a knife, under her bed. J.M. also made statements about the letter, indicating his desire to kill K.G.
Conclusion: The Court held that the school board did not violate the student's First Amendment rights when it expelled him.

References

Church of Scientology of Cal. V. United States, 506 U.S. 9 (1992).

Doe v. Pulaski County Special School District, 306 F.3d 616 (8th Cir. 2002).

Planned Parenthood of the Columbia/Willamette, Inc. v. Am. Coalition of Life Activists, 290

F.3d 1058, 1075 (9th Cir. 2002).

Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705 (1969).