Arrested For Blogging About The Police?
from the where-do-you-draw-the-line dept
A bunch of folks have been submitting this story about a blogger who was effectively arrested for blogging about the police, raising a series of free speech issues. As the article notes, the woman hardly makes for a sympathetic symbol of free speech rights. She appears to be a racist supporter of segregation and also seems to have an obsession with the local drug enforcement task force, posting all sorts of information about what they were doing and who was on the task force. But the question is whether any of it actually broke the law. What led to her arrest was posting home address info -- and a photo of the home -- of an officer on the task force. However, as the article linked above notes, that information was gleaned from public sources that anyone could have looked up had they chosen to do so. Making that a crime doesn't seem to make much sense. The police didn't even charge her with obstruction of justice, but with "identifying a police officer with intent to harass." The problem is such a law is so broad, it raises serious First Amendment issues. The woman isn't exactly a model citizen, but it still seems like a stretch to arrest her for revealing information that is already public.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: blogging, first amendment, free speech, police
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You're good. :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
on top of this, it's not kosher to post ANYONE's photo and address on a site, even if it is technically public information. singling out people by posting their pics, home addresses, and politically charged info about them should be illegal. she's no better than the nutjobs posting the same info about doctors who perform abortions. assuming the facts in that article are true, i'd convict this lady in a heartbeat... and i hate cops.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
or when they ask "can you dig it?" do you find yourself responding "nope, i don't have a shovel"?
or when they ask "you're not the brightest crayon in the box, are you" do you ever respond "i'm a human... not a crayon"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
even if it is technically public information.
Restating public information shouldn't be a crime. Now, I agree, stating it and then inciting people to hurt that person is a crime. Just posting it would seem like a douchebag move, but it perfectly legal.
So, yes: Just because it's not kosher doesn't make it illegal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Actually, the charge is arrest with intent to intimidate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Actually, the charge is arrest with intent to intimidate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free Speech
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Speech
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Speech
as such needing full constitutional protection.
Unfortunately, we have judges with mostly personal agendas on almost every bench, comedians each with a weird sense of humor on the SCUS, their jokes incorporated into judgments that are somehow passed-off and accepted as "good behavior" by the voters -- those voters with zero political savvy who deserve the gov't that they get, in all three branches of gov't...
VRP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can't say I'm surprised this happened.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If our free speech protections don't cover screaming fire in a crowded theatre I don't see how they apply in posting police officers home addresses with the intent to harass. As long as they prove in court that her intent was to harass and not just inform.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
We have your IP, ISP & Location
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GAWD now the nutcase will have a following
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Also notice how this artificially reduces competition and hence makes newspapers and such relatively more valuable (and makes the info more expensive. I could go into the economics of how this benefits newspapers economically but it's not worth it).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
and there's a huge difference between a sea of names and addresses on some whitepages site and a page that has the photo of the guy, a photo of his home, the house address, and some statement to the effect of "this is a douchebag cop who is destroying society."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Police
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free Speech
And lets not get into the bogus law that they are charging her with.
"screaming fire in a theater", undercover pigs needing protection; are you serious? Sorry, I'm not going to be a hypocrit and tell you to STFU but you really need to take a step back and think. Secrecy, sorry if the cops cannot redact the appropriate info that's their problem, not the public's. And the "fire in a theater" what is that default apron strings the feeble-minded cling too, it's not even a stretch.
Cops are not here to protect you, get that thru your heads!
See: Castle Rock v. Gonzales
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Speech
See: Castle Rock v. Gonzales
u r a nut case just like her
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Free Speech
VRP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How is this different than what the NY Att. General did with AIG executives. He threatened to release a list of the executives home address. A list was circulated and people did in fact show up at their homes.
I wonder though, the article says she is a racist yet she has a problem with the local drug enforcement units? Who does she think they mostly arrest?
Sometimes getting someone off the streets is a good thing, no matter the charge.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That, sir or ma'am, *is* racist. ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I kind of understand where they are coming from.
While I agree that she didn't really break the law and therefore should not have been arrested, I have to say that the alternatives could have been much worse.
Lets say that she continued to post info and nothing was done to stop it. Eventually public officials are going to be getting harassed to the point that legislation would past to make such information classified, or push individuals in public jobs to lie about personal information to avoid such treatment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
secret?
umm I don't think there is a damn thing about secrecy when I police officer takes the oath. ITS SUPPOSED TO BE A DANGEROUS "JOB". There are no guarantees and the war on drugs is a laugh. JEEZ!
Cops do everything they don't need to and are not meant to. They say they need more power we as the people who are regulated by them know better. Like someone said...as of right now they ARE not here for your betterment. good day.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
EXCEPT She didn't threaten.
on top of this, it's not kosher to post ANYONE's photo and address on a site, even if it is technically public information. singling out people by posting their pics, home addresses, and politically charged info about them should be illegal
Glad the law governs such things, and not your useless, Stalinist opinion. It's off to the gulag for your comrade.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FREEDOM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]