"Any person subject to this chapter who causes another person of any age to engage in a sexual act by- (3) threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person will be subjected to death, grievous bodily harm, or kidnaping"
This did not happen.
"They didn't need to threaten her or hold her down"
I doubt she could convince a jury that she felt her life was in danger, she was going to suffer bodily harm, or would be arrested if she did not consent to the search.
That being said, if she believes she was raped, then she should file rape charges and let the courts decide. Personally, I see no reason why she should not file rape charges if she feels she was raped.
But she made accusations of rape without filing any charges. Unless her accusation is proven, then it is legally considered false. In the United States, the TSA Agent is legally considered innocent of the charges until she is proven guilty. So therefore it is very likely that the blog accusations are currently defamatory.
Whether or not we feel she was or wasn't raped or assaulted is absolutely irrelevant when considering the defamation charges.
The bottom line is the TSA Agent has not been proven guilty, so the accusation is defamatory until such time.
Was there a threat of arrest, incarceration or deportation if she didn't consent to the search? From my understanding, anyone who refuses the search at worst is simply denied access to their flight. If the TSA agent said, "you cannot walk away and go home, either you let me pat you down or I will arrest you", then I would certainly agree with you.
However, I didn't see any claims that she had to consent or she would be locked up.
In order to obtain a conviction for a California sexual battery, the prosecution must prove each of the following three facts:
(1) That you touched the intimate part of another,
(2) That the touching was
(a) Against the will of the other person, or
(b) That consent was fraudulently obtained, and
(3) That you touched the other person to specifically cause sexual arousal, sexual gratification, or sexual abuse.
I would think the TSA agent would argue the touching was not against her will, as she consented to the search and it was not fraudulently obtained since the search was TSA policy.
Again, I do not condone the searches. Not only do I consider them against the 4th Amendment, but I also believe that there are TSA agents who abuse this illegal authority even further. However the woman's responsibility here was to contact police and file charges. She cannot just go making rape accusations without having any proof that her accusations are true.
If you are victimized, go to court. Prosecute the crime. Don't just go home and publish an accusation on the Internet and then act surprised when you get taken to court yourself.
The TSA agent did not say that she would kill, beat or kidnap the woman if she did not submit to her search. She did not hold her down and grope her against her will. I think her accusation warrants sexual assault charges, but the Federal definition of rape would not fit. Perhaps California has broader definitions, and if so, the action should be compared to California law. No other state laws would apply however, if the crime was committed in California.
If you call a police officer to report a crime, the officer is obligated to take the report. The officer is not a judge and does not have the authority to dismiss any claim that a crime has been committed.
Sure you can claim someone raped you without filing charges and having them prosecuted, however if you do not, then the person you made the accusation against can take action against you for defamation.
Suppose someone accused you of rape. Suppose they posted this accusation on a blog, with information connecting you specifically to the accusation. That post gets indexed by Google. Any employer in the future that does a web search on you may see this and choose not to hire you based on this information. Do you think you have to just accept it? Do you not have any recourse to recover damages an unproven accusation can cause to you?
People cannot make serious accusations against others without being held responsible for said accusations if they are not proven to be true. Legally, she could be charged with both slander and libel.
The appropriate place to accuse someone of a crime is in court. Once the crime is tried and a conviction is granted, then she could post a blog declaring she was raped and it would be supported by the court as a factual statement of record.
Publishing and/or verbally communicating to others that a specific person raped you without going to court is a crime itself.
"I do think it was at least 'wrong', if not illegal, to name the security agent publicly. File charges and name them that way, but publicly by screaming "You raped me!" and then following up with talking about it online using names just strikes me as a bit more than Ms. Alkon likely should have done."
So when a woman is sexually violated and is emotionally traumatized she should just move along quietly? Her outburst at the time of the incident is understandable.
If she files charges, that information is public knowledge as well.
I do agree that an accusation of rape should require charges to be filed. I'm not sure who would advise a woman who endured what she claims that assault charges are a non-starter. If you are going to accuse someone publicly of a crime, then you must follow through with an attempt to have that person prosecuted. Failure to do so would open yourself up, in my eyes, to defamation.
If she publicly named the woman on a blog without pressing charges, then the TSA agent should be able to take legal action. If someone accuses me of rape, and puts that accusation on the Internet with my name, to be found for who knows how long by anyone Google searching my name, it could have very serious effects on my employment, and many other things.
If I am found not-guilty of the accused crime, I should also have recourse against the woman for a defamatory blog post. I think the woman took a foolish step making the accusation on a blog post before the incident was prosecuted as a crime. She should have immediately called the police and filed sexual assault charges. I personally would not see what happened as rape, but as always, I'm not a lawyer. However, based on her description, I think sexual assault would be appropriate.
I'm not a fan of the TSA policy at all. But we cannot allow one crime to justify another.
I already have Starz on demand as part of my HBO package. But if Netflix doesn't start getting a LOT better streaming selection (I too dropped the DVD side as they wished) I'm going to have to drop them altogether. Between Hulu, Crackle and the fact that I can watch full episodes of my favorite shows on SyFy and History Channel, there is less and less of an incentive to keep paying for Netflix.
Not only do you have copyright on the recording of the song, but apparently you will also become a co-author of the song and be able to expect credit for any future uses of it!
It doesn't matter that you took no part in writing or performing the song. You recorded one performance of it. Now it's partly yours for not only your lifetime, but also the lifetime of your estate. :)
If the government accuses your business of doing something illegal, should it have the right to direct all your business to their own location, where there is the appearance to those you do business with that you are a criminal? Should it also make it difficult for people who used to go to your business to now find it?
All the while having no actual evidence of any crime (after all, if they really had evidence that a crime was being committed, they would have taken servers, etc)?
This is nothing more than an attempt for the government to destroy a business it cannot prosecute for a crime, in the name of special interests.
The thing is, that top 20% may have half the wealth, but the rest of the population has 80% of the vote. Stop letting the 20% tell you how to vote. Don't believe you have to vote Democrat or Republican. Vote for your interests. Vote for your fellow citizens' needs. That being said, the first step is to educate people. The next step is to get alternatives to the status quo on the ballots.
Or you could make excuses as to why it can't be done because some people are rich. Even the non-rich in America have access to the Internet. You don't need riches to get the message out, you just need excited citizens to get their friends excited and educate each other.
While I will firmly speak out against our liberties being taken, we are putting those who take them into power. You may not have riches, but your one vote is equal to the richest person's one vote.
It's not the institution of our government, it's the people we keep sending to operate it. How do we send the right people? Enough of the right people have to stand up and run for office.
Think about the Tea Party movement. It's had an influence in government and it's messages are mixed, with a lot of religious and current establishment baggage.
The Tea Party has however, shown us that a grass roots political movement can advance. The U.S. needs a strong Civil Libertarian political movement like the Tea Party people have.
I believe that the majority of our citizens ultimately believe in the rights of individuals and personal freedoms. Decades of systematic programming have made the masses believe they must accept the actions of the government representatives.
We just need to start electing leaders instead of politicians. :)
If the U.S. can take websites from other countries, why doesn't it just seize all terrorist communication websites, and a significant portion of websites in China, Russia, and any other country where the US deems the website violates US laws, regardless of how the home country views it?
There comes a time when police will carry around pre-signed search warrants and go door to door looking for anything, taking everything, then filling out the warrants later if they find something.
On the post: TSA Agent Threatens Woman With Defamation, Demands $500k For Calling Intrusive Search 'Rape'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technical definition
This did not happen.
"They didn't need to threaten her or hold her down"
I doubt she could convince a jury that she felt her life was in danger, she was going to suffer bodily harm, or would be arrested if she did not consent to the search.
That being said, if she believes she was raped, then she should file rape charges and let the courts decide. Personally, I see no reason why she should not file rape charges if she feels she was raped.
But she made accusations of rape without filing any charges. Unless her accusation is proven, then it is legally considered false. In the United States, the TSA Agent is legally considered innocent of the charges until she is proven guilty. So therefore it is very likely that the blog accusations are currently defamatory.
Whether or not we feel she was or wasn't raped or assaulted is absolutely irrelevant when considering the defamation charges.
The bottom line is the TSA Agent has not been proven guilty, so the accusation is defamatory until such time.
On the post: TSA Agent Threatens Woman With Defamation, Demands $500k For Calling Intrusive Search 'Rape'
Re: Re:
On the post: TSA Agent Threatens Woman With Defamation, Demands $500k For Calling Intrusive Search 'Rape'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Technical definition
However, I didn't see any claims that she had to consent or she would be locked up.
On the post: TSA Agent Threatens Woman With Defamation, Demands $500k For Calling Intrusive Search 'Rape'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Technical definition
However, at http://www.shouselaw.com/sexual_battery.html
There seems to be some details on Sexual Battery.
In order to obtain a conviction for a California sexual battery, the prosecution must prove each of the following three facts:
(1) That you touched the intimate part of another,
(2) That the touching was
(a) Against the will of the other person, or
(b) That consent was fraudulently obtained, and
(3) That you touched the other person to specifically cause sexual arousal, sexual gratification, or sexual abuse.
I would think the TSA agent would argue the touching was not against her will, as she consented to the search and it was not fraudulently obtained since the search was TSA policy.
Again, I do not condone the searches. Not only do I consider them against the 4th Amendment, but I also believe that there are TSA agents who abuse this illegal authority even further. However the woman's responsibility here was to contact police and file charges. She cannot just go making rape accusations without having any proof that her accusations are true.
If you are victimized, go to court. Prosecute the crime. Don't just go home and publish an accusation on the Internet and then act surprised when you get taken to court yourself.
On the post: TSA Agent Threatens Woman With Defamation, Demands $500k For Calling Intrusive Search 'Rape'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Technical definition
On the post: TSA Agent Threatens Woman With Defamation, Demands $500k For Calling Intrusive Search 'Rape'
Re: Re: Re: Anybody see the bottom...
On the post: TSA Agent Threatens Woman With Defamation, Demands $500k For Calling Intrusive Search 'Rape'
Re: Re: Re: Anybody see the bottom...
Suppose someone accused you of rape. Suppose they posted this accusation on a blog, with information connecting you specifically to the accusation. That post gets indexed by Google. Any employer in the future that does a web search on you may see this and choose not to hire you based on this information. Do you think you have to just accept it? Do you not have any recourse to recover damages an unproven accusation can cause to you?
People cannot make serious accusations against others without being held responsible for said accusations if they are not proven to be true. Legally, she could be charged with both slander and libel.
The appropriate place to accuse someone of a crime is in court. Once the crime is tried and a conviction is granted, then she could post a blog declaring she was raped and it would be supported by the court as a factual statement of record.
Publishing and/or verbally communicating to others that a specific person raped you without going to court is a crime itself.
On the post: TSA Agent Threatens Woman With Defamation, Demands $500k For Calling Intrusive Search 'Rape'
Re: Re: Technical definition
On the post: TSA Agent Threatens Woman With Defamation, Demands $500k For Calling Intrusive Search 'Rape'
Re: Anybody see the bottom...
So when a woman is sexually violated and is emotionally traumatized she should just move along quietly? Her outburst at the time of the incident is understandable.
If she files charges, that information is public knowledge as well.
I do agree that an accusation of rape should require charges to be filed. I'm not sure who would advise a woman who endured what she claims that assault charges are a non-starter. If you are going to accuse someone publicly of a crime, then you must follow through with an attempt to have that person prosecuted. Failure to do so would open yourself up, in my eyes, to defamation.
If she publicly named the woman on a blog without pressing charges, then the TSA agent should be able to take legal action. If someone accuses me of rape, and puts that accusation on the Internet with my name, to be found for who knows how long by anyone Google searching my name, it could have very serious effects on my employment, and many other things.
If I am found not-guilty of the accused crime, I should also have recourse against the woman for a defamatory blog post. I think the woman took a foolish step making the accusation on a blog post before the incident was prosecuted as a crime. She should have immediately called the police and filed sexual assault charges. I personally would not see what happened as rape, but as always, I'm not a lawyer. However, based on her description, I think sexual assault would be appropriate.
I'm not a fan of the TSA policy at all. But we cannot allow one crime to justify another.
On the post: Starz, Netflix And How Industry Jealousies Strangle A Golden Goose
No effect on me
Is it too early to say R.I.P. ?
On the post: Court Upholds $60,000 Ruling Against Blogger... Even Though His Statements Were True
The Psychic Jury Knows
On the post: The Insane Chain Of Sampling Rights: How A Folk Song Collector Became A 'Co-Author' On A Jay-Z Song
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It doesn't matter that you took no part in writing or performing the song. You recorded one performance of it. Now it's partly yours for not only your lifetime, but also the lifetime of your estate. :)
On the post: Puerto 80 Appeals: Asks Court To Recognize That Trampling The First Amendment Is Substantial Harm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
All the while having no actual evidence of any crime (after all, if they really had evidence that a crime was being committed, they would have taken servers, etc)?
This is nothing more than an attempt for the government to destroy a business it cannot prosecute for a crime, in the name of special interests.
On the post: More People Waking Up To The Troubling Implications Of The Gov't Taking $500 Million From Google
Re: Re: Re: Re: idk bout u
Or you could make excuses as to why it can't be done because some people are rich. Even the non-rich in America have access to the Internet. You don't need riches to get the message out, you just need excited citizens to get their friends excited and educate each other.
While I will firmly speak out against our liberties being taken, we are putting those who take them into power. You may not have riches, but your one vote is equal to the richest person's one vote.
On the post: More People Waking Up To The Troubling Implications Of The Gov't Taking $500 Million From Google
Re: Re: idk bout u
It's not the institution of our government, it's the people we keep sending to operate it. How do we send the right people? Enough of the right people have to stand up and run for office.
Think about the Tea Party movement. It's had an influence in government and it's messages are mixed, with a lot of religious and current establishment baggage.
The Tea Party has however, shown us that a grass roots political movement can advance. The U.S. needs a strong Civil Libertarian political movement like the Tea Party people have.
I believe that the majority of our citizens ultimately believe in the rights of individuals and personal freedoms. Decades of systematic programming have made the masses believe they must accept the actions of the government representatives.
We just need to start electing leaders instead of politicians. :)
On the post: DOJ: This Case Has Nothing To Do With Puerto 80; Now Here Is Why Puerto 80 Is Guilty
Explain to me
On the post: US Copyright Group, Hurt Locker Producers Sue Dead Man & Others Unlikely To Have Infringed
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: ICE Screws Up, Seizes Tor Exit Node; Vows Not to Learn From Its Mistake
Coming to a Future Near You
On the post: ICE Screws Up, Seizes Tor Exit Node; Vows Not to Learn From Its Mistake
Re: Re:
On the post: RealNetworks Destroying Dutch Webmaster's Life Because He Linked To A Reverse Engineered Alternative
Hmm
Google Search: "Files encoded with Real Networ.." Bah lost interest. Closed Browser, went back to playing Conan Unchained.
Next >>