A Stitch in Haste

Boing Boing conveniently provides a link to Massachusetts' anti-Lite-Brite statute:

Whoever possesses, transports, uses or places or causes another to knowingly or unknowingly possess, transport, use or place any hoax device or hoax substance with the intent to cause anxiety, unrest, fear or personal discomfort to any person or group of persons shall be punished[.]

Boing Boing commenters know their first-year criminal law:

Most interesting is that the statute defines the crime in terms of a specific intent: "the intent to cause anxiety, unrest, fear or personal discomfort to any person or group of persons."

This specific intent will be hard to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, in my opinion.

I think he's absolutely right — even "motion to dismiss" or "motion for directed verdict" right.

On the other hand, I could — in my dystopic paranoia — easily see this becoming a case of "reverse jury nullification," of which I have warned before. Jurors could easily "vote their conscience" (i.e., "Perhaps they didn't actually break this particular law, but I think they should be punished anyway for causing so much trouble...").

If you believe in jury nullification, then this is what you believe in.

(The defendants are also charged with disorderly conduct.)