Slashdot Mirror
Text Messages in the Courts
KennyG944 noted a story running on CNN which talks about Text Messages being used in the Kobe Bryant trial. This raises a host of issues about the phone company keeping these messages around and expectations of privacy.
That is why I never used text messaging in the first place. THEY are watching us everywhere we go.
I think if you communicate over a network that is regulated by the company itself, as well as a federal orginization, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy. (like now)
Judge: "Have the jurors reached a verdict?"
Jury: "Yes, your honor."
Judge: "Bailiff, please bring the vedrict to me."
(Bailiff brings paper to judge)
Judge: "Jurors, please state your verdict."
Jurors: "We find the defendant, Kobe Bryant, GLTY ON L CHRGS. LOL!!1! WTF?"
This is what I thought at first but then I RTFA and learned it is about being able to access the phone company's log of what you text message. I trust my privacy to no one and just assume that any thing I type is recorded and can be easily accessed. I find it best to whisper the important things directly in the persons ear.
By memorizing the PGP source code, I'm able to encrypt all of my SMS. You'd think that'd be hard, but the really difficult part is keeping everyone's keys straight in your head.
So you think that if I FedEx a letter to someone I should expect FedEx to open it, photocopy it and store it in an archive somewhere? Or that if I make a phone call, I should expect that the telco tapes it and keeps the tape for an indefinite amount of time?
It's the same thing here really - SMSs are basically condensed phone messages, and it is definitely a reasonable expectation that your phone conversation is confidential between you and the other party, and that it stays that way.
There's a huge difference between storing who phoned who (or in the case of FedEx: "person Foo payed for a package to be sent to person Bar at YYYY-MM-DD") and actually storing the contents. In a reasonable privacy climate, phone companies should definitely be busted for this... but with Ashcroft et al. in charge, it is more likely that SMS retention becomes law rather than a punishable act.
Actually, they may well be VERY relevent, depending on what the message contained.
There was a famous trial in the 1920's of a rags to riches hollywood comedian named Fatty Arbuckle, who was accused of raping a young woman with a coke bottle in his bathroom, during a party. He had actually gone to trial 2x on a hung jury, but on the 3rd trial, it was revealed that a star witness for the prosecution (a woman of dubious character) had sent a telegram to an associate a few hours after the alleged incident saying that she had Fatty over a barrel and was going to squeeze him, or something to that effect. He was aquitted on the third trial, although his career was destroyed by that time.
http://ms.essortment.com/arbucklefatty_rams.htm
My rights don't need management.
That joke sounds familiar...
You probably shouldn't click this.
- sending people who looked like they might drive while intoxicated to prison for years;
- castrating people who we arbitrarily decided might commit rapes at some point in the future;
- executing people who we felt might commit murder in the future?
Actually, that last one would probably be a real time saver, since the trial would be much shorter than it is now ("Who do you think?". "That guy over there". "What, the one with the squinty eyes?". "Yeah". "OK, he'll do")Do you have any idea of the trouble it is to "cry rape" when it isn't? Do you know how victims are treated? Do you know how many rapes are not reported each year because women are afraid of being treated like they did something wrong?
Because that's bullshit. Honest to God rape versus date rape? Are you fucking kidding? Just because I go to dinner with a guy and make out on his couch afterwards doesn't mean I owe him a goddamn thing. Whether or not he paid for dinner.
It's not women who should be worried about being in bad situations, even though that is the reality. It's men who should be taught that they don't get to take whatever they want, and to respect a woman when she says no. That seems pretty simple to me.
On the Kobe note, do you honestly think he is going to get into serious trouble, even if it is proven that he did rape her? Mike Tyson went to jail for raping a woman and was applauded and welcomed back with open arms by many fans. Then he bit the ear of a man who intentionally walked into a boxing right to fight him and these same people went absolutely apeshit and called for him to be banned from boxing. What? The ear of a professional boxer is worth more than that which is most precious to a woman?
That's the message that is sent, though. Which is why athletes will continue to get away with this shit; they're treated like they're better than everyone else, even when they act just as awfully and cowardly as the next guy.