Pixiq

“they were nonetheless speech and constitutionally protected”

Wrong. Not all speech is constitutionally protected. Threats are speech and they’re also crimes. You really need to get over this misconception that because speech is speech, ipso facto it is protected by the constitution. Never has been. You continue to make yourself look like an idiot because you don’t know nor understand the law.

The great irony of all this is that if Elisha Strom had her way, people like Carlos Miller would be in a concentration camp. Nazis aren’t real big on personal liberties.

@NC

You have to use the whole statement.

“Some of her postings may have consisted of obnoxious speech, but they were nonetheless speech and constitutionally protected.”

It’s really convenient to leave out the part that defines it as a form of protected speech, and then go on about a form of unprotected speech that isn’t part of the case at hand.

“The great irony of all this is that if Elisha Strom had her way, people like Carlos Miller would be in a concentration camp. Nazis aren’t real big on personal liberties.”

Freedom of speech for all citizens, no matter how obnoxious and how hateful they are, is how constitutional rights work. If only people the majority agreed with had freedom of speech, we wouldn’t need the First Amendment.

It’s people like you that think only “worthy” people deserve these rights that really worry me. In that way you’re worse than a Nazi.

hope all you want aint gonna happen. go back to your super double secret blog and whine with your other punks in blue. i am not just a cop hater. i despise them with all my being. big bad cop once broke my arm for telling him i dont answer to him. by the way i was 12. defend that jackass. yep 40 yrs later i still think your all shit. i say all because every police force has someone like you and the rest cover up. without your toys and steroids most of you would be punks in the real world. enough hate for you? feel free to take some home with you for everyone you tell what a hero you are. be sure to bully your children so they can carry on when you off yourself

I don’t think that posting pictures of an undercover officer, along with pictures of his car, pictures of his house, and a google map with directions is really covered as protected speech.

Do you honestly think that this couldn’t be dangerous for the officer and his family? I agree that people can post criticisms and complain about police all day. This is a completely different case. Don’t let your anti-police bias cloud your common sense in this case.

JohnnyLaw-

Those were all things in public view and publicly accessible. She’s not the threat to the officers and their families; those cops being so bad at being “undercover” is the threat.

You don’t seem to have any problem using these resources yourself.

http://law-chronicles.blogspot.com/2009/08/thank-you-google.html

You don’t seem to understand the difference in researching public records for an investigation compared to taking pictures of cops homes and posting them online. Can you imagine the outrage if I did that with one of my suspects? I think you would probably be one of the ones screaming the loudest. Of course if it happens to a cop it is okay.

Actually JohnnyLaw, as a police Officer you are paid quite well to enforce the law and must act within the Laws governing those investigations, such as rules of evidence, harassment, and guard the investigation’s integrity. And yes, even ride a lot of disrespect. As a matter of fact, investigators do take pictures of subjects, their homes, cars, and anything else. Investigators use the internet everyday to investigate suspects; (face book, my page, tweeter, etc.). However, to publicly release information of an investigation would be an egregious violation of Justice; to the suspect’s rights and the cast against him. It would probably lead to charges against you. All this to say, you must act under the color of law not as a citizen. Your description of this woman’s rights, leaves many questions to fairness as an investigator. I hope you would be astute to following evidence and not circumstantial incidents. He was in the right location and a close match to the perpetrator, has sent many innocent Americans to jail. I am not making assumptions of your integrity, just saying your commentary could cloud people’s image of you.

JohnnyLaw,

“Can you imagine the outrage if I did that with one of my suspects?”

Police have provided photos of suspects to the public since the 19th century. Mug shots, and then there’s the perp walk — where any member of the public may photograph the subject.

Photographing members of the police force, *in plain public view*, is a constitutionally-protected activity. Do you understand that, was it covered in your training?

Or are you a cop who arrests and charges photographers for “disorderly conduct” because they took pictures at your crime scene?

NC

re concentration camps.

That’s what the Second Ammendment’s for.

Johnny Law

If you give a drug dealer a cop’s name, address and street view you feed him for a day.

If you teach a drug dealer to use Google you will feed him for the rest of his life.

Ahh I love it how the anti-cop types scream about the rights of all people except the police. Who cares if information is posted that could cause harm to their families?

She obviously intended to cause harm to the police and I hope she rots in jail for it. Take all the pictures of cops on traffic stops that you want. Leave the personal information out of it.

I would address the color of law issue that JohnnyLaw is conveniently ignoring, but Santee and Jon have already done a fine job.

Would you care to tell us just how that possible harm works? If some random person can find out all these things, what’s to stop anyone else? Are there droves of ex-cons scouring the web to find blogs that just happen to have information on the cops that busted them? How many times has this actually happened in real life?

Or are you basing your security concerns on movies and other speculative fiction?

You’ve obviously already divined her exact motives have convicted her in your own mind. Would you like to dispense with the judge and jury?