Joel is at a protest when he faces an opposing protest. Joel yells, "Don't let those bloody, criminal.un-American jerks step on your rights, no matter what! We stay; they leave!" The police try to makeJoel's group back up. Joel's group of protesters charges the other group and the police.Unfortunately, Joel's group injures three people, including a police officer. Joel is indicted for incitinga riot. Joel argues that he was exercising his right to free speech. Two of the state's witnesses, whowere members of Joel's group, testified that they would not have participated in the riot withoutJoel's call to action. Concerning this case against Joel, here is the most likely result:The jury could return a verdict of guilty, decide that Joel is not guilty, or simply be unable to reach a verdict:certainly, the First Amendment's free speech provision does not protect all speech, but on the other handeven strong language does not necessarily mean that a speaker is responsible for how individuals react to hisspeech.mThe jury will return a verdict of not guilty, because, even if Joel's speech was hateful and inspired his followersto act violently, Joel has the right to free speech as long as he (Joel) himself did not personally take part in actsof violence.The jury will return a verdict of guilty because Joel's speech is obscene.O The jury will return a verdict of guilty, because Joel's language was defamatory.O The jury will return a verdict of not guilty, because the right to protest, especially if it is about matters of"politics," is nearly absolute.

Joel's involvement in a protest in the scenario above takes a turn for the worse when it is claimed…

Joel is at a protest when he faces an opposing protest. Joel yells, "Don't let those bloody, crim un-American jerks step on your rights, no matter what! We stay; they leave!" The police try to Joel's group back up. Joel's group of protesters charges the other group and the police. Unfortunately, Joel's group injures three people, including a police officer. Joel is indicted for a riot. Joel argues that he was exercising his right to free speech. Two of the state's witnesse were members of Joel's group, testified that they would not have participated in the riot with Joel's call to action. Concerning this case against Joel, here is the most likely result: The jury could return a verdict of guilty, decide that Joel is not guilty, or simply be unable to reach a ve certainly, the First Amendment's free speech provision does not protect all speech, but on the other even strong language does not necessarily mean that a speaker is responsible for how individuals reac speech. The jury will return a verdict of not guilty, because, even if Joel's speech was hateful and inspired his fa to act violently, Joel has the right to free speech as long as he (Joel) himself did not personally take par of violence. O The jury will return a verdict of guilty because Joel's speech is obscene. The jury will return a verdict of guilty, because Joel's language was defamatory. The jury will return a verdict of not guilty, because the right to protest, especially if it is about matters "politics," is nearly absolute.

Joel is at a protest when he faces an opposing protest. Joel yells, "Don't let those bloody, crim un-American jerks step on your rights, no matter what! We stay; they leave!" The police try to Joel's group back up. Joel's group of protesters charges the other group and the police. Unfortunately, Joel's group injures three people, including a police officer. Joel is indicted for a riot. Joel argues that he was exercising his right to free speech. Two of the state's witnesse were members of Joel's group, testified that they would not have participated in the riot with Joel's call to action. Concerning this case against Joel, here is the most likely result: The jury could return a verdict of guilty, decide that Joel is not guilty, or simply be unable to reach a ve certainly, the First Amendment's free speech provision does not protect all speech, but on the other even strong language does not necessarily mean that a speaker is responsible for how individuals reac speech. The jury will return a verdict of not guilty, because, even if Joel's speech was hateful and inspired his fa to act violently, Joel has the right to free speech as long as he (Joel) himself did not personally take par of violence. O The jury will return a verdict of guilty because Joel's speech is obscene. The jury will return a verdict of guilty, because Joel's language was defamatory. The jury will return a verdict of not guilty, because the right to protest, especially if it is about matters "politics," is nearly absolute.