THOMAS v. VANIHEL

• Court: District Court, S.D. Indiana
• Decided: June 27, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-00183
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA TERRE HAUTE DIVISION

GENTLE THOMAS, JR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 2:25-cv-00183-JPH-MKK ) FRANK VANIHEL, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND STRIKING PLAINTIFF'S LETTER

On June 5, 2025, the Court received a document from Plaintiff entitled "Misc. Letter to Judge James Patrick Hanlon" which states, among other things: Me and a group of individuals are planning to kill you and your family in the following month. I know where you reside. I know what vehicle you drive, the make year, and model. . . . You are going to die its in Gods will and it will be by my own personal doing. Take this letter in heed because you are on borrowed time. . . . I have someone on the inside that can set up pipe bombs that can destroy the entire courthouse . . . .

Dkt. 12. The Court takes threats very seriously, and, as such, this filing has been forwarded to the United States Marshals Service to take whatever action it deems necessary. Moreover, the Court points out that threatening to kill a federal judge is a criminal offense under 18 U.S.C. § 115. Further, the Court will not provide litigants relief in response to threats. A threat such as this would support dismissal of this case with prejudice. See Helmueller v. Anderson, 2023 WL 8111459, at *1–2 (7th Cir. Nov. 22, 2023) (approving dismissal of case as a sanction for sending death threats to the court: "We have .. . affirmed dismissals as a sanction for threatening violence or other insubordination that disables the judiciary from functioning." (citing Castillo v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 938 F.2d 776, 779-81 (7th Cir 1991))); Hughes v. Varga, 2021 WL 3028145 (7th Cir. July 19, 2021) (affirming of dismissal of case with prejudice where pro se plaintiff threatened to kill judge, noting that plaintiffs "horrific behavior easily supports dismissal with prejudice as a sanction."). The Court directs Plaintiff to show cause, by July 25, 2025, why this case should not be dismissed with prejudice. Further, the clerk is directed to docket a copy of this Order in Plaintiffs other cases currently pending before this Court: Thomas v. Vanihel, 2:24-cv-78-JRS-MKK; Thomas v. Daniels, 2:25- cv-285-JPH-MG; and Thomas v. Warden, 2:25-cv-90-JPH-MG. Finally, "[ajllegations may be stricken as scandalous if the matter bears no possible relation to the controversy or may cause the objecting party prejudice. The decision whether to strike material as scandalous is within the discretion of the district court." Talbot v. Robert Matthews Distrib. Co., 961 F.2d 654, 664-65 (7th Cir. 1992) (cleaned up). The clerk is directed to strike Plaintiff's letter at dkt. [12] as entirely scandalous. SO ORDERED. Date: 6/27/2025 Sjamnu Patrick \bawlove James Patrick Hanlon United States District Judge Southern District of Indiana

Distribution:

GENTLE THOMAS, JR. 267721 WABASH VALLEY - CF Wabash Valley Correctional Facility Electronic Service Participant – Court Only

Courtney Leanne Staton Office of Indiana Attorney General courtney.staton@atg.in.gov