Wilmington man gets five years for threatening to burn down Roxbury mosque; prosecutors hope other haters get the message

A federal judge yesterday sentenced Patrick Keogan, 46, to five years in federal prison for offenses that included threatening to burn down the Islamic Society of Boston mosque at Roxbury Crossing, after federal prosecutors asked for a stiff sentence in part to show other racists what they can expect.

US District Court Judge Douglas Woodlock also sentenced Keogan to five years of parole after his release for threatening the society and an Islamic student group at Northeastern University on their own Facebook pages and for possession of child pornography and dozens of firearms, including light machine guns, assault rifles, and sniper rifles and thousands of rounds of ammunition, none of which he should have had because of earlier convictions.

Keogan pleaded guilty to charges related to the threats, the firearms and ammunition and the child pornography last year.

In its request for the sentence, the US Attorney's office in Boston said Keogan deserved the sentence in part because he looks like the kind of guy who would just pick up where he left off otherwise:

There is good reason to believe that Mr. Keogan will re-offend. He has committed crimes over a long period that has persisted through his middle age. He appears to resist the idea that his conduct was blameworthy. He also appears to resist the idea that his drinking affects his judgment. He can expect little support from his family when he leaves prison. All of these conditions led Mr. Keogan to be classified as a moderate to high risk for future violence and threats against others, and unlikely to comply with restrictions unless he is under strict supervision. These conditions all call for a significant period of incarceration.

But prosecutors also argued for a stiff sentence to send a message to other haters:

While all of Mr. Keogan's crimes deserve blame, this is particularly true of the threats. Not because threats are inherently more morally culpable than the other charges, but because threats hurt victims while parts of society see racist threats as blameless. The Court can play an important societal function in placing blame where it lies. ...

In Mr. Keogan's case, he is seen primarily as a threatener of Muslim groups, and his other crimes seem relevant to the public primarily because they were uncovered in the context of his threats. But a significant sentence would be likely to deter similar racist threats. Mr. Keogan's case was of public interest when it was announced, and the public continues to be interested in online discourse and racist threats. Moreover, threats made online suffer from network effects. That is, when someone surfing the Internet sees a threat online, he may conclude that the norms of public discourse have changed to allow such discourse free of penalty. A significant sentence that reaffirms that such discourse is prohibited could readjust those public norms.

Woodlock's sentence of five years is actually three months longer than the US Attorney's office had asked for.