Federal Judge Rules Threats to 'Skin' Judge Breyer Were 'True Threats,' Not Political Hyperbole

SAN FRANCISCO (LN) — U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar on Friday denied a motion to dismiss the superseding indictment against David Brooks Pokorny, concluding that a series of emails threatening to "skin" Senior U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer to death were not protected by the First Amendment.

The indictment charges Pokorny with influencing a federal official by threat under 18 U.S.C. § 115(a)(1)(B) and using interstate communications with a threat to kidnap or injure under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c).

The charges stem from a 45-minute email barrage sent to the Northern District of California’s media address on Sept. 2, 2025, from an account linked to the Brisa Pacific Hotel in Encinitas, California.

Over the course of the exchange, Pokorny sent 11 messages, repeatedly declaring "This is terrorism" and outlining a "concrete plan to use terrorism to control California courts & judges."

"I want you to visualize skinning US District Judge Charles Breyer to death," one email read. "We’ll skin him, take pictures, and send you the pictures."

Pokorny argued the emails were protected political hyperbole, characterizing the skinning threat as "an expression of fantastical political vitriol" that was not a "realistic, believable way of killing someone."

Tigar rejected that argument, noting that while skinning is "empirically rare" as Pokorny argues, Pokorny identified no social or political history that would lead a reasonable observer to view the threat as purely hyperbolic.

"The content of Pokorny’s emails inarguably conveys a threat of violence and not merely a hyperbolic or emotionally charged political message," Tigar wrote.

The judge pointed to the specificity of the threats, the repetitive nature of the emails, and the fact that they were sent to a specific court address rather than a public forum as factors weighing against First Amendment protection.

Pokorny also argued that his physical distance from Judge Breyer’s workplace in San Francisco negated the threat, but Tigar dismissed this, noting that "Experience teaches that distances of miles are not an obstacle to someone who is committed to carrying out a threat."

The court also denied Pokorny’s request for the government to identify which specific emails constituted true threats, ruling that the full context of the communications is relevant to the analysis.

In a separate ruling, Tigar ordered the government to produce the legal instructions provided to the grand jury for in camera review, but denied Pokorny’s request for disclosure of the evidence presented to the grand jury, finding he failed to show a "particularized need" for the materials.

Pokorny is scheduled to appear in court for a status conference.