It's probably going to be bit transparent what inspired this question, but assume someone gives a long speech in which he declares that an entity is doing terrible things and then urges everyone listening to go to the entity's specific location, but the speech doesn't otherwise contain any overt calls for breaking the law.
Is there some US case law on incitement that has rendered a guilty verdict in a situation like that? Or at least case law where someone was (actually) charged under similar circumstances, but the verdict was "not guilty" or even the case was dismissed early?
There's fairly related q here, but it doesn't specifically ask for case law, nor do the answers provide any--they just quote the statues and their own interpretation thereof. Brandenburg v. Ohio (mentioned there) seems somewhat relevant here, but its general test
Advocacy of force or criminal activity does not receive First Amendment protections if (1) the advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and (2) is likely to incite or produce such action.
doesn't seem incredibly illuminating here; is riling up someone and directing them to a specific location "inciting or producing imminent lawless action" if the persons who go there do actually engage in lawless action (even if the speech doesn't explicitly call for it)? I think some actual case law on incitement may be more illuminating here.
I actually found a discussion of "oblique" aka "indirect incitement" in a paper on English law, which is illustrated (inter alia) with this hypotehtical example:
The second example is drawn from Mill’s essay, On Liberty. The passage, though occasionally mentioned in commentaries on the essay, has received little detailed consideration, least of all from a legal point of view:
No one pretends that actions should be as free as opinions. On the contrary, even opinions lose their immunity when the circumstances in which they are expressed are such as to constitute their expression a positive instigation to some mischievous act. An opinion that corn dealers are starvers of the poor, or that private property is robbery, ought to be unmolested when simply circulated through the press, but may justly incur punishment when delivered orally to an excited mob assembled before the house of a corn dealer, or when handed about among the same mob in the form of a placard.
But are were there any actual cases like this in US jurisprudence?