Felony charges for posting pictures of police officer

[griffin]

I don't believe Mr. Paige was involved in a drug case against the media outlet that released his name or photo. Different animal.

He was an undercover DEA agent and when his identity got "burned" he could no longer perform that role. The video was shot by a private person.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I know this isn't an apples to apples comparison but what about sex offender registries? What if a guy distributed photos to everyone in the neighborhood regarding a sex offender and harm came to the sex offender because of it?

If the photos were distributed with the intent to incite someone to cause harm then he could be held liable.

OK, the obvious explanation to expect (truthful or otherwise) is that the intent was for neighboring parents to keep their children on a short leash when this individual was out. It is going to be virtually impossible to prove otherwise in the event that someone does something deleterious to his longevity, even if that was the true hope behind the posting. Likewise, the argument could be made that these people were merely trying to protect their hoodlum friends, both those on their Christmas list and those they haven't met yet but value more so than they value the police, from being scheduled for a long-term 'vacation' as guests of the state. Assisting others in not finding themselves the targets of the criminal justice system and making an attempt to have the officer, his family, his dog, and the illegal Mexican who mows his grass all killed are two different things, and once again, lacking supernatural powers it is virtually impossible to prove intent to cause harm.

Let me throw out another example of a broadly similar nature. I do not have a CB radio installed in my truck because, frankly, I get tired to listening to a bunch of BS with no apparent purpose other than to stop silence from happening. That doesn't change the fact that I am aware that a common topic of discussion is the location of any police who may be on the highway. This is generally done for the purpose of preventing others from getting ticketed with moving violations, not as an invitation for the next guy to run over the cop with his truck, and even if someone did run over the cop, there is no way in the universe it could be proven that this was the intent of the person who announced the officer's location.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I don't believe Mr. Paige was involved in a drug case against the media outlet that released his name or photo. Different animal.

Being the defendant in the case at hand (if applicable) strips you of your First Amendment rights?

 

[public servant]

Being the defendant in the case at hand (if applicable) strips you of your First Amendment rights?

If your speech is designed to cause harm or to promote potential violent acts against others it is not protected.

We'll just have to wait and see what the courts feel their intentions were.

 

[IndyDave1776]

If your speech is designed to cause harm or to promote potential violent acts against others it is not protected.

We'll just have to wait and see what the courts feel their intentions were.

What the court feels? This is supposed to be based on objective, provable fact, not whether the judge has indigestion or his dog bit him that morning! You have just given us a boilerplate answer to a question that obvious cannot be definitively answered. As previously addressed, there are plausible explanations which cannot be proven false that do not include the promotion of violence. The existence of a plausible explanation that does not include a given defendant being guilty of a crime, as I am sure you would recall, is a reasonable doubt.

 

[phylodog]

Really? What happened to Richard Armitage for revealing Valerie Plame?

I dunno, the Gov't bought him a Ferrari and a beach cottage in the Bahamas?

 

[griffin]

Revealing the identities of CIA operatives hasn't gone over too well for a few who chose to do so.

Really? What happened to Richard Armitage for revealing Valerie Plame?

I dunno

That's what I thought.

 

[public servant]

What the court feels?

What the courts decide. Better?

 

[IndyDave1776]

What the courts decide. Better?

Better word choice, but it doesn't do much for the fact that the first version of your statement was probably more correct and that so many of our courts have forgotten what the Constitution is.

 

[phylodog]

Really? What happened to Richard Armitage for revealing Valerie Plame?



That's what I thought.

Well why don't you share your intellectual superiority with the rest of the class?

 

[ATOMonkey]

If you don't want you identity to be burned, you need to do a better job protecting it.

cameras are everywhere. Be a better operator.

 

[Fargo]

Well why don't you share your intellectual superiority with the rest of the class?

The answer is a resounding "Nothing". No indictment, no charges, no anything.

Plus he was both a gov't employee and it was in relation to a foreign intelligence officer.

That is fundamentally different from an ordinary citizen and a domestic LEO.

Gov't employees have heightened duties as a matter of law and domestic LEO's fall under a much different "political speech" category under the constitution.


Best,

Joe