Freedom of speech?

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Freedom of speech?

Postby ctdeathfrombelow » Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:47 am

Apparently a judge can suppress your right to defend yourself in court by not allowing your attorney to mention the 1st amendment.....

Jeff Olson, the 40-year-old man who is being prosecuted for scrawling anti-megabank messages on sidewalks in water-soluble chalk last year now faces a 13-year jail sentence. A judge has barred his attorney from mentioning freedom of speech during trial.


http://rt.com/usa/california-man-13-prison-banks-237/
User avatar
ctdeathfrombelow
hunter
 
Posts: 1501
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: Connecticut: The Confiscation State


Re: Freedom of speech?

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:32 am

ctdeathfrombelow wrote:Apparently a judge can suppress your right to defend yourself in court by not allowing your attorney to mention the 1st amendment.....

Jeff Olson, the 40-year-old man who is being prosecuted for scrawling anti-megabank messages on sidewalks in water-soluble chalk last year now faces a 13-year jail sentence. A judge has barred his attorney from mentioning freedom of speech during trial.


http://rt.com/usa/california-man-13-prison-banks-237/



Something about this has to be wrong... I cant imagine they can prevent you from doing that. :huh:
There are only two types of people in the world, those who love duck hunting and those who never have duck hunted.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 8015
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: Freedom of speech?

Postby ScaupHunter » Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:33 am

There is an instantaneous appeal to the higher court! You can't deny someone the right to use their 1st Amendment rights in a court case. It doesn't matter what the vandalism law says. The Constitution is higher law.

So what are we going to do now? Start putting little kids in jail for using chalk on the sidewalks? I would like to know if he left the messages on private property, or if he placed the messages in the public right-of-way.

Private side = vandalism
Public side = freedom of expression.

We really have become a society of idiots. Does the court and city not have anything more important to do with their time?
Last edited by ScaupHunter on Thu Jun 27, 2013 1:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6458
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Freedom of speech?

Postby vincentpa » Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:34 am

So if I go and smash the windows of the IRS or the DNC as a demonstration of my outrage with the two organizations could I claim a Freedom of Speech defense?

What if I spray paint their buildings? Paint is removable too.

Vandalism is vandalism. I imagine if this is the guy's first offense, he will be ordered to pay a fine and pay to have the graffiti removed. Any other sentence would be extraordinary. The author of the article just provided what is probably the maximum sentence to evoke an emotional response from the readers.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Freedom of speech?

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:39 am

vincentpa wrote:So if I go and smash the windows of the IRS or the DNC as a demonstration of my outrage with the two organizations could I claim a Freedom of Speech defense?

What if I spray paint their buildings? Paint is removable too.

Vandalism is vandalism. I imagine if this is the guy's first offense, he will be ordered to pay a fine and pay to have the graffiti removed. Any other sentence would be extraordinary. The author of the article just provided what is probably the maximum sentence to evoke an emotional response from the readers.


I completely agree with you, but it was done with chalk nothing permanent.

It's not vandalism if there is not permanent damage that requires man hours to deal with.

That's like saying that dropping crumbs from lunch is vandalism of what it lands on.
There are only two types of people in the world, those who love duck hunting and those who never have duck hunted.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 8015
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: Freedom of speech?

Postby ScaupHunter » Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:41 am

Physical destruction of property is completely different than kids chalk that washes off in the rain or blows away in the wind over time. Your analogy doesn't work. Speaking of taking it over the top.........

One destroys property the other doesnt even technically deface it since it quickly goes away in the the natural environment. The bank was pissy, wielded influence, and the guy just had his individual rights denied to get a conviction by a judge who should never have sat the bench. I have dealt with grafitti, and other vandalism laws on a lot of properties. Locally this one would have been handled through a simple citation by an officer with a small fine, then run through the lower courts.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6458
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Freedom of speech?

Postby Gunnysway » Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:42 am

I don't think what he did, right or wrong, is in question. I think the big issue is barring his attorney from mentioning freedom of speech during the trial. It would be up to the Jury or Judge to decide if it were FOS or vandalism. But to prevent the attorney from using that approach to defend his client seems strange... :huh:
Setting up meetings between geese and God since 1992...

Gud till ära, oss till gagn...
User avatar
Gunnysway
hunter
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 11:46 am
Location: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell

Re: Freedom of speech?

Postby vincentpa » Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:47 am

ScaupHunter wrote:Physical destruction of property is completely different than kids chalk that washes off in the rain or blows away in the wind over time. Your analogy doesn't work. Speaking of taking it over the top.........

One destroys property the other doesnt even technically deface it since it quickly goes away in the the natural environment. The bank was pissy, wielded influence, and the guy just had his individual rights denied to get a conviction by a judge who should never have sat the bench. I have dealt with grafitti, and other vandalism laws on a lot of properties. Locally this one would have been handled through a simple citation by an officer with a small fine, then run through the lower courts.



The only difference between paint and chalk is the amount of effort to remove it. So what happens if the incident happened in Phoenix during the dry season? The graffiti would last for weeks or months.

The first amendment is no defense for vandalism, ever. Vandalism is vandalism whether it is on public or private property. There is no distinction.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Freedom of speech?

Postby slowshooter » Thu Jun 27, 2013 11:17 am

Maybe this is judicial activism in action. The judge might be gifting the attorney with a reason to squirrel the whole trial.

Perhaps he thinks it's silly and the Banks don't need more attention - or that as the message is out it could actually get you into prison that it's enough and the guys shouldn't serve.

Or, he's right and there is no free speech component.

:huh:
All this for a bowl of borscht.
User avatar
slowshooter
hunter
 
Posts: 9019
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 8:44 pm
Location: San Jose, CA

Re: Freedom of speech?

Postby ScaupHunter » Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:03 pm

vincentpa wrote:
ScaupHunter wrote:Physical destruction of property is completely different than kids chalk that washes off in the rain or blows away in the wind over time. Your analogy doesn't work. Speaking of taking it over the top.........

One destroys property the other doesnt even technically deface it since it quickly goes away in the the natural environment. The bank was pissy, wielded influence, and the guy just had his individual rights denied to get a conviction by a judge who should never have sat the bench. I have dealt with grafitti, and other vandalism laws on a lot of properties. Locally this one would have been handled through a simple citation by an officer with a small fine, then run through the lower courts.



The only difference between paint and chalk is the amount of effort to remove it. So what happens if the incident happened in Phoenix during the dry season? The graffiti would last for weeks or months.

The first amendment is no defense for vandalism, ever. Vandalism is vandalism whether it is on public or private property. There is no distinction.



There has to be damage for it to be vandalism. Chalk is no permanent and thus does not qualify. Now harrassment might just fly in court and could potentially be a valid complaint. As for private vs public property. That totally changes everything. Who is pressing charges, who has rights to press charges, who gets compensated, etc.... If the chalk was on public property this is a complete BS case and never should have been pursued. It is chalk. We would have laughed about it here locally. It it was on private property it is still a BS case. They have full time staff that works maintenance and operations that can take 5 minutes out of their day to sweep some chalk off the concrete. $6,000 my ***! We have a grafitti crew that works full time here. I asked them what they would do about the chalk. They chuckled and said nothing, or just hit it with a stiff broom with a sweep or two and it is gone. There are a lot of factors here. The big one seeming to be infringement of the freedom of expression. The other being big business getting it's undies in a wad about being called to task. Then using the gang enforcement office as their personal bully boys. It was clearly not gang related and as such that is abuse of the police and wasting of a government officials time.

If they were so bent about this they could have just taken the man to court and handled it through civil action. Except they know it would have been thrown out on First Amendment issues there.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6458
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am


Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: gock5, ScaupHunter, SpinnerMan and 13 guests