Parents of Kentucky State University Student Killed in Shooting Charged With Online Threats Toward Jacob Bard

The fatal shooting of a Kentucky State University student earlier this month has taken a new legal turn, as the victim’s parents now face criminal charges in Indiana stemming from alleged online threats made in the aftermath of their son’s death. Jail and court records in Vanderburgh County show that both parents were arrested on Christmas Day and charged with intimidation, a development that has added another layer of complexity to an already emotionally charged case.

The situation unfolds against the backdrop of a grand jury’s recent decision not to indict the man initially accused in the shooting, who has since been released from jail after his legal team argued the incident was an act of self-defense. Authorities say the intimidation charges are tied to social media posts directed toward Jacob Bard, the individual who was initially accused in the December 9 shooting that resulted in the death of De’Jon Fox Jr., a student at Kentucky State University.

Although prosecutors ultimately did not secure an indictment against Jacob Bard, the online statements allegedly made by the victim’s parents have drawn the attention of law enforcement in Indiana, where the posts were interpreted as threats. The arrests and subsequent court proceedings highlight the legal consequences that can arise from online speech, particularly when it is perceived as menacing or connected to the potential for violence.

The case has resonated widely, not only because of the tragic loss of a young college student, but also because it illustrates the collision between grief, social media, and the criminal justice system. While Jacob Bard’s release closed one chapter of the legal process surrounding the shooting itself, the charges against Fox Jr.’s parents suggest that the fallout from the incident is far from over.

Details of the Arrests and Charges

According to jail records in Vanderburgh County, Indiana, 38-year-old De’Jon Fox and 37-year-old Chardnae Cleveland were arrested on Christmas Day and each charged with intimidation. Police records indicate that the charges stem from alleged online threats made toward Jacob Bard following the shooting at Kentucky State University earlier in December. Investigators reviewed social media activity that they say crossed the line from expressions of grief and anger into statements perceived as threatening.

An affidavit filed in the case outlines specific posts attributed to each parent. One post allegedly written by Fox stated, “You will feel the same hurt I feel.” Authorities interpreted the statement as a direct threat toward Jacob Bard, suggesting an intention to cause harm or distress in retaliation for the death of Fox Jr. Another post attributed to Cleveland read, “Might drive to Evansville today and see some Vice Lords!” Evansville police said the reference was significant because the Vice Lords are a well-known street gang with a history of violence and organized criminal activity.

Investigators concluded that the statement could be interpreted as an implied threat involving gang-related violence. Both Fox and Cleveland were taken into custody and later bonded out of jail. Court records show that the intimidation charges were filed one day after their son was killed in the shooting, underscoring how quickly events escalated in the days following his death. The timing suggests that the alleged posts were made while emotions were still raw, a factor that defense attorneys in similar cases often cite when arguing intent.

Read : 20-Year-Old Indian Student Shivank Avasthi Shot Dead Near University of Toronto’s Scarborough Campus

However, under Indiana law, intimidation charges do not require proof that a threat was carried out, only that a statement was made with the intent to place another person in fear of retaliation. Cleveland appeared in court for her initial hearing on Friday, where she told the judge that she does not know about gangs and denied any intent to threaten anyone.

Read : India Surpasses China as the Largest Source of International Students in Germany

She also stated that she voluntarily turned herself in and emphasized that she has never been arrested before. Fox, however, did not appear for his scheduled court hearing. As a result, the judge issued a warrant for his arrest without bond, a decision that reflects the seriousness with which courts treat failures to appear, regardless of the underlying charge.

Grand Jury Decision and Bard’s Release

The intimidation charges against Fox and Cleveland come just days after a grand jury declined to indict Jacob Bard in connection with the December 9 shooting at Kentucky State University. Jacob Bard had been initially accused in the incident and was held in jail while the case was reviewed. Earlier this week, however, the grand jury determined that there was insufficient evidence to bring criminal charges against him.

Jacob Bard’s legal team said the decision not to indict was based on evidence that the shooting was an act of self-defense. While details of the incident itself have not been fully disclosed in public records, self-defense claims typically hinge on whether the accused reasonably believed they were in imminent danger of serious bodily harm or death. In such cases, prosecutors must overcome a high legal threshold to secure an indictment, particularly when witness statements or physical evidence support the self-defense narrative.

Following the grand jury’s decision, Jacob Bard was released from jail. His attorneys welcomed the outcome, reiterating their position that he acted lawfully under the circumstances. The decision effectively closed the criminal case against Bard, at least for now, though civil litigation remains a possibility in many cases involving fatal shootings. For the family of De’Jon Fox Jr., however, the lack of criminal charges against Bard has likely intensified feelings of frustration and grief, emotions that authorities say may have fueled the online posts now at the center of the intimidation case.

Law enforcement officials have emphasized that the intimidation charges are separate from the shooting investigation and are based solely on the content of the alleged online threats. From a legal standpoint, the fact that Jacob Bard was not indicted does not diminish the seriousness of the charges against Fox and Cleveland, as intimidation statutes are designed to protect individuals from threats regardless of the outcome of related cases.

Legal and Community Impact of the Case

The unfolding legal proceedings have raised broader questions about how the justice system navigates cases involving intense public emotion, particularly when social media becomes a platform for expression. For grieving families, online posts can serve as an outlet for pain and anger, but law enforcement agencies increasingly monitor such activity for statements that may be construed as threats. Prosecutors argue that this scrutiny is necessary to prevent potential acts of violence, while critics contend that context and emotional distress should be weighed more carefully.

In Indiana, intimidation is a felony offense that can carry significant penalties if a defendant is convicted. The charge generally involves communicating a threat with the intent that another person engage in conduct against their will or be placed in fear of retaliation. References to gangs or violent organizations, even if not accompanied by explicit threats, are often treated seriously by investigators because of the potential implications for public safety.

The case has also had a ripple effect within the Kentucky State University community and beyond. The death of De’Jon Fox Jr. was a profound loss for classmates, faculty, and family members, and the subsequent legal developments have kept the tragedy in the public eye. University officials have not commented publicly on the intimidation charges, but campus communities often struggle to process such events, particularly when questions of self-defense and accountability remain unresolved in the eyes of those affected.

For Fox and Cleveland, the road ahead includes navigating the criminal justice system while continuing to mourn their son. Cleveland’s statements in court suggest she intends to contest the charges, while Fox’s failure to appear has complicated his legal situation. The issuance of a warrant without bond indicates that authorities may seek to take him back into custody if he does not surrender voluntarily.

As the case moves forward, it underscores the far-reaching consequences of violent incidents and the legal complexities that can follow. What began as a tragic shooting on a college campus has now expanded into multiple legal proceedings across state lines, involving questions of self-defense, online speech, and the boundaries of lawful expression during periods of grief. The outcome of the intimidation charges will likely hinge on how courts interpret the intent and context of the alleged posts, a determination that could have implications for similar cases in the future.