Free speech, or viable threat: Views vary in ‘scarecrow’ case

Whether and how words cross the line from politicking to threatening is being tested in Acton. 

Schools Superintendent Laurie Hunter told police that makeshift “scarecrows” targeting her this fall made her fear for her safety. Prosecutors say Acton resident John Grace, 56, violated a harassment prevention order by placing the signs.

His lawyer, George King, contends that is free speech and said during Grace’s arraignment, “This whole case is improper.”

Asked about King’s claims, a Middlesex County District Attorney’s Office spokesperson said she couldn’t comment because the case remains open. 

Legal experts contacted by The Acton Bridge offered varied opinions on a possible First Amendment defense.

Lawyers’ perspectives

Displays started appearing in September, featuring trash bags affixed to crossed green stakes. The signs included the stenciled words: “Fire Liar Hunter.” 

One display at Sleepy Hollow Cemetery near Bedford Street and Partridge Lane also featured the words “Muskets for Musk? The hatchet for Hunter! Hate, waste, bulling [sic], higher taxes.”

Police arrested Grace at his home on November 25 after tracing a fingerprint lifted from a sign in Acton Center to him, according to a report from Detective Sgt. Keith Harrington.

The Bridge spoke to legal experts who, though not involved in the Grace case, have experience in areas such as free speech and orders of protection. 

Joseph Lipchitz, of the Boston office of the Saul Ewing law firm, said he’s not sure Grace’s alleged writings meet the legal concept of a true threat, “because it’s clear that he’s advocating for [Hunter’s] political removal.” 

Another attorney, David Russcol of Zalkind Duncan + Bernstein, said that if the hatchet reference is a call for Hunter’s ouster, it seems like protected speech. “If it’s understood as a threat of violence,” he said, “then that could be a different determination.” 

Although some saw merit in the free speech argument, most lawyers who spoke with The Bridge agreed it’s not a slam dunk. 

Edwin Howard II at Bonville & Howard, who has represented people with harassment prevention orders against them, told The Bridge that with such orders comes “some loss of your liberty.”

Legal proceedings involving John Grace 

2017: Acton police deny Grace a license to carry firearms due to prior narcotics convictions. 

2020: A school psychiatrist files a 51A report with the Department of Children and Families regarding concerns about Grace’s home. 

2022: Police arrest Grace based on allegedly escalating remarks directed at schools Superintendent Laurie Hunter and her office. According to a police report, Grace first became upset with the school system as a result of the 2020 filing. He is arraigned and placed on house arrest. 

2024: Grace is acquitted in a jury trial.

May 2025: Hunter secures a harassment prevention order against Grace. The order will remain in effect until at least May 2026. 

September 2025: Police start investigating a series of makeshift “scarecrow” displays targeting Hunter. 

November 2025: Police arrest Grace on a charge of violating a harassment prevention order in connection with the “scarecrow” displays. Grace is released on his own recognizance pending trial. 

Source: Acton police reports, Acton District Court records 

‘Not infallible’

Harrington said Hunter told police that she was afraid when she saw the “hatchet” phrasing, because “she felt there was an element of violence to it.”

That sign appeared near Acton-Carlisle School Committee Chair Tracey Marano’s home. Marano told investigators she thought the display was meant to intimidate her. 

Acton police previously arrested Grace in 2022 after he allegedly threatened to hurt Hunter, according to then-Chief Joseph O’Connor. A jury exonerated Grace last year, but police said Hunter secured a harassment prevention order in May 2025 that will stay in effect until at least May 2026.

The order bars Grace from harassing Hunter with willful and malicious conduct “intended to cause fear, intimidation, abuse, or damage to property.” 

In the new criminal case, Brendan Cox of Laredo, Smith & Kane said prosecutors must prove Grace physically placed the signs. Cox has at least one active case similar to Grace’s. “Fingerprints,” he said, “are not infallible.” 

The Bridge asked Hunter and Marano about the defense’s free-speech claims. District spokesperson Thomas Lucey responded, “Neither the Administration nor the School Committee have any further comments.”

Glenn Koocher, executive director of the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, said First Amendment rights don’t cover threats of harm, so he’d be “very surprised” if a judge dubbed all of Grace’s alleged actions protected speech. 

In the public eye 

Lipchitz said political speech and attacks on politicians can be “caustic, abrasive, hostile, and offensive.” Yet, he said, “that’s precisely the type of speech that needs to be given breathing space.”

Cox said Hunter’s public status “should factor into the analysis” because it changes “the degree of privacy the person is entitled to and the degree of public discourse that they can expect to be subjected to.”

But Howard took a different tack, saying that when a court issues a harassment prevention order, the law doesn’t differentiate based on someone’s position as a public official.

Grace is due back in court in February for a pretrial hearing.

Speaking to The Bridge, he maintained that Hunter is “trying to muzzle me,” saying, “We’re excited to get closer to the exoneration.”

Trace Salzbrenner contributed reporting.