person that seriously alarms, annoys, torments or terrorizes the person, and that serves on legitimate purpose. (3) "Credible threat” means a verbal or written threat, including that which is communicated via electronic means, or a threat implied by a pattern of conduct or a combination of verbal or written statements and conduct made with the intent and the apparent ability to carry out the threat so as to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for such person’s safety. The present incarceration of a person making the threat shall not be a bar to prosecution under this section. 39 . Petitioner relies on cases in which the statutes are worded quite differently than § 123 and do not contain limiting language. See Moore, 37 Wash.App. 862, 683 P.2d 617 (<HOLDING>); Wisconsin v. Dronso, 90 Wis.2d 110, 279
holding that after the district court determined that the plaintiffs speech was protected the court was required to inform the jury of its ruling that knapps speech was constitutionally protected holding that washingtons harassment statute was unconstitutionally overbroad because it covered constitutionally protected speech holding new yorks disclosure law unconstitutionally overbroad holding that felony harassment statute was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad because it proscribed threats to harm a persons mental health but did not define that term holding that a statute must burden a substantial amount of protected speech to be unconstitutionally overbroad