In the complicated world of swastikas, cyberspace, free speech and illegal threats, William A. White walks a fine line.

On Sept. 20, as thousands of protesters converged on the small town of Jena, La., to support six black youths charged with assaulting a white classmate, White entered the fray from Roanoke. On a Web site that is the heart of his neo-Nazi group, White posted what he said were the defendants' names and addresses along with this suggestion: "Lynch the Jena 6."

Within hours, the FBI said it was reviewing the Web site and would seek an opinion from prosecutors.

The question is this: How far can someone like White go -- using the Internet to post daily dispatches filled with racial slurs, veiled threats and his trademark swastikas -- before he crosses the line between free speech and criminal conduct?

White is perilously close to that threshold, legal scholars and hate crime experts said in interviews last week. But there seems to be little or no precedent for bringing criminal charges in such a case.

"Repugnant as these comments may be, they aren't, strictly speaking, illegal," said Donald Green, a professor of political science at Yale University who has written extensively about hate crime.

There is no evidence that White personally contacted the Jena defendants or threatened to lynch them himself; he just publicized their contact information to be used by anyone who, as he put it, might be "willing to deliver justice."

"You can advocate all you want, as long as you do not cross the line into imminent, direct threats against an individual," Green said. If, however, someone were to act on White's suggestions, that might increase his potential culpability, Green said.

Even then, another complication would be the 934 miles that separate Jena from Roanoke, where White presumably posted his comments. Courts have generally held that there must be a close connection between someone who incites violence and the act itself -- a fiery speaker agitating an angry crowd to riot, for example.

White's Internet rants have drawn scrutiny from law enforcement in the past, most recently when he published the home address and telephone number of Miami Herald columnist Leonard Pitts during a furor over a column Pitts wrote about black-on-white crime.

But White has never been charged, and he predicted last week that this time will be no different.

"I don't care if I'm protected by the First Amendment or not, but I don't believe they're going to charge me with anything," he said.

"I was expressing my point of view."

Asked if he intended to express his point of view directly to the Jena Six defendants, White said: "I don't care. I'm not an attorney, and I don't care if I crossed it [the line] or not. That's for the legal people to decide."

While criminal charges against White appear to be a long shot, legal experts said a civil action might not be.

James McElroy, an attorney with the Southern Poverty Law Center, said White's case appears similar to that of an anti-abortion group that posted on its Web site the names and addresses of "wanted" physicians who performed abortions.

The Web site did not directly advocate violence. But when several of the doctors were later killed, their names were crossed out. The names of others who were wounded were shaded in gray.

In 1999, a federal jury in Portland, Ore., found that the tactics amounted to threats and ordered the American Coalition of Life Activists to pay $109 million in damages.

An appellate court later slashed the award to $4.7 million but let stand the ruling that the activists were not exercising constitutionally protected political speech.

"Violence is not a protected value," Judge Pamela Rymer wrote in the opinion. "Nor is a true threat of violence with intent to intimidate."

In some cases, victims of hate crimes have been able to recover damages from the leaders of white supremacy movements, even when the leaders did not personally participate in the attacks.

Working with the Southern Poverty Law Center, McElroy won a $12.5 million verdict against Tom Metzger, head of the White Aryan Resistance, for his role in the death of a black man. Metzger was found responsible because he recruited and trained the white supremacists who committed the murder, McElroy said.

"The jury found it never would have happened had it not been for the leader, even though the leader was asleep in bed at the time," he said.

In White's case, however, the six black teenagers whose contact information he listed on his Web site have not been harmed, despite continued suggestions from White that he would not be disappointed if they were.

In a Thursday posting on Overthrow.com, White noted that "we have received communications from the White Order of Thule stating that they have 'business' with the Jena 6.

"For those unfamiliar with the White Order of Thule, imagine a prison gang composed entirely of highly intelligent and utterly insane serial killers," the post read. "If any of them are out of prison, I would not be surprised if there is some action in Jena pretty soon."

White, founder of the Roanoke-based American National Socialist Worker's Party, has a history of using the Internet to inject his views on current events both local and national.

The case in Jena gave him national exposure that critics say he craves.

Jena was recently put under the media spotlight when thousands of protesters converged on the central Louisiana town to decry what they called unfair treatment of six black high school students charged with assaulting a white classmate.

The assault followed racial unrest over an incident last September in which nooses were hung from a tree on the Jena High School campus. The nooses appeared shortly after a black student requested permission to sit under the tree, long considered to be an exclusive gathering spot for white students, according to media reports.

Critics complained that the black students were treated more harshly than the whites who hung the nooses.

Already thrust into the middle of the largest civil rights demonstration in years, the teens have reportedly been getting even more unwanted attention because of White.

"Some of the families have received almost around the clock calls of threats and harassment since this website appeared," the Rev. Al Sharpton, who has joined the protestors in Jena, said in a statement.

An official with the FBI office in New Orleans has said little more than to confirm an ongoing investigation.

"The FBI and our Law Enforcement Partners are aware of allegations that various threats have been made against those involved in the Jena Six case and their families," special agent Sheila Thorne said in a statement. "Threats are taken seriously, and as these investigations are ongoing we cannot comment further."

At least one hate crime expert believes authorities may have a case under a federal law that makes it illegal to interfere with someone's civil rights.

Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism, said he believes the use of the word "lynch" has especially sinister connotations, given the historical context of how blacks were treated in the deep South.

"Based on what has happened in Louisiana, and based on the background of this organization and statements Mr. White has allegedly made in the past, I believe there is enough evidence to bring a case before a jury, and a jury should decide whether this constitutes a genuine threat," Levin said.

Whether that ever happens, though, is a call for the federal government to make.