United States v. Williamson
83 F. Supp. 3d 394
D.D.C.2015Background
- Defendant Jeff H. Williamson, a prolific anti‑government website author, made numerous threatening and harassing communications over many years directed at FBI Special Agent Brian Schmitt and others.
- Prior related convictions: in 2010 Williamson was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c) for threatening to blow up FBI HQ (42 months); he later violated supervised release and was incarcerated again.
- In June 2014 Williamson left repeated threatening voicemails to a U.S. Attorney and, on June 19, 2014, called D.C. 911 and threatened to shoot FBI SA Brian Schmitt in the head.
- He was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 115(a)(1)(B) for threatening a federal law enforcement officer with intent to retaliate on account of official duties; he was tried pro se, admitted making the call, and was convicted.
- Sentencing Guidelines recommended 15–21 months (offense level 12, CHC III), statutory maximum 10 years; the government sought upward departure for prolonged harassment and the court granted an upward departure and sentenced Williamson to 96 months imprisonment and 36 months supervised release.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an upward departure under U.S.S.G. § 2A6.1 comment n.4(B) is warranted for prolonged harassing communications | Government: prolonged, multi‑year campaign of threats about Schmitt justifies upward departure | Williamson: his threatening calls were not directed to Schmitt over a prolonged period (many were to third parties), so comment n.4(B) doesn't apply | Court: Departure warranted — communications concerning the same victim via various recipients over many years satisfy comment n.4(B) and statutory offense elements do not require direct communication to the victim |
| Whether the § 115 offense was proven as retaliation on account of official duties | Government: the jury heard evidence of sustained harassment tied to Schmitt’s role in the 2005–06 citations and convicted | Williamson: his motive was political persecution/gangstalking in D.C., not retaliation for Schmitt’s official acts | Court: Jury verdict stands; evidence supports that threats targeted Schmitt because of his official involvement in the earlier tickets |
| Appropriate sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) given Guidelines and defendant’s history | Government: severe sentence needed for deterrence, public protection, and because previous prison sentences did not deter Williamson | Williamson: sought downward departures and mitigation (various filings) | Court: Considered § 3553(a) factors, noted prior convictions, repeated threats, refusal of treatment; sentenced to 96 months as sufficient but not greater than necessary |
| Whether mental‑health treatment or less severe sanctions could suffice | Williamson: rejected mental‑health treatment and asserted other defenses | Government: defendant unlikely to comply with treatment; prior penalties ineffective | Court: Lack of willingness to undergo treatment and repeated violent threats justified longer incarceration to protect public |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Elonis, 730 F.3d 321 (3d Cir. 2013) (discusses standards for distinguishing true threats from protected speech)
- United States v. Stewart, 411 F.3d 825 (7th Cir. 2005) (true threat defined by reasonable recipient’s interpretation as intent to inflict bodily harm)
- United States v. Fulmer, 108 F.3d 1486 (1st Cir. 1997) (threat under § 115 need not be face‑to‑face to be criminal)
- Booker v. United States, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) (Sentencing Guidelines advisory; consider § 3553(a) factors)