Does freedom of speech shield menacing threats? Or does the law have the right to step in when verbal threats instill fear and potential harm? We found ourselves in a labyrinth of these questions in our latest episode, guided by the landmark Supreme Court decision on Counterman versus Colorado. We unwind the intricate layers of defining a threat, especially in this digital age, where threats can be disguised behind the veil of anonymity. We weigh the subjective intent of the speaker against the objective perspective of a reasonable person and question which should hold more weight in legally certifying a threat.
Eric sits down with fellow instructor and friend Paul Butler to explore approaches to leadership and the key elements of team building. Paul is...
This episode of the Guardian Mindset Podcast with Attorney Eric Daigle breaks down the Supreme Court’s Case v. Montana decision and what it means...
Episode Summary: Ever contemplated the complexity of decision-making in high-stress, life-changing moments? In this compelling episode, we delve deep into the multifaceted realm of...