Police Director Sues AOL For Critical Blogger's Name
Pippin writes "Memphis Police Director, Larry Godwin, is suing AOL for the names of the authors of the Enforcer 2.0 blog. The blog is rumored to be authored by a Memphis police officer, and is critical of the department, Godwin, and some procedures. Godwin is actually using taxpayer dollars for this and, interestingly, the complaint is sealed".
with a Godwin Law violation...
If the bloggers are leaking information that harms investigations then Larry is doing the right thing; if they are merely critical of Larry then they should be encouraged at their efforts to improve the police service.
I don't know whether to be amusingly or annoyingly about the quality of the editing round here.
At the bottom of the
to the actual blog: http://mpdenforcer20.blogspot.com/
I don't actually think there's anything intrinsically "technological" about this story, be it the fact that there's an anonymous whistle-blower or that the boss is trying to hunt him down, except maybe the amount of people the blogger it could reach. But, and yes I know this clearly is not the case, the Internet was supposed to free us and allow us to share knowledge and information freely and that includes opinions. Since that obviously is no longer here (If it ever was), I think it's time to find or create something else.
Because all you have really ensured is that the blog will get a decent amount of free publicity.
Oh I forgot about the First Amendment being repealed and the new laws forbidding freedom of speech... oh wait
Yes, what you say is true, but you forget that this America! We are KINGS of misappropriating funds to defend politicians and law enforcement, and our legal system is all for supporting such practices (since it helps protect them as well). Screw what is right, what about the status quo!
Yes, this statement is perhaps pandering, but it's also painfully true (dammit).
You know who else sued AOL for a critical blogger's name?
...where I live.
The police aren't allowed to try to find the source of information in cases like this. IF the blogger is seen as a journalist, which may or may not be the case. Not sure what the latest rulings say.
Though most policemen are good people, I've heard stories of various 'Rambos' and other scummy types in police departments that would give the Zimbabwe PD a good run for the money. Most of these abuses are not reported by other cops because of guaranteed retribution. We need the anonymous blogs to get this crap in the open and dealt with. This case needs to be unsealed (public office after-all) and dealt with fairly.
The correct action is to give Larry Godwin as much rope as he wants. Record everything. Document everything. Ensure this pooled information is made accessible to the blogger somehow - someone'll know who it is. People who are upset make mistakes. Pushing them deeper into their paranoia and neurotic state of mind will cause them to make bigger and bigger mistakes. It's not entrapment, as nobody is making Mr Godwin do anything illegal, they're not even suggesting it. It would be his choice, with the alternative being to back off. He has total free will. Once he has done something openly illegal, provided immunity doesn't cover him, arrest him for it.Even if immunity did cover him, this is election year and politicians aren't going to want to leave a loose cannon in a public position. He'll be removed from office.
The result will not be a court decision (which never helps anyone) but will give whistleblowers additional measures they can take.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Posted by Dirk Diggler MPD
;)
I notice that they haven't even linked the blog directly.
Does anyone care about the stories, or it it just "another libertarian story that they'll love"?
Granted, it wasn't hard to click through from the article, but it's not as if blogspot as going to get slashdotted, and free speech needs examples, not just meta-waffling.
Wikileaks, no DNS
So now the police need protection from the police. The privacy issues which they seek to deny civilians in the pursuit of justice they will adamantly defend for themselves. Of course there is a difference between Managers and Employees, but the symbolism is striking.
Everything I ever say is either my opinion (what else should it be?) or it is the opinion of someone else,
And it is your responsibility to make the distinction when you speak:
"He committed this illegal act." (Implies "in the opinion of the people making up the legal system", which is the opinion that counts.)
"I believe he committed this illegal act." (In your opinion, which probably doesn't count.)
"The NYT reports that he commited this illegal act." (The NYT opinion, let them worry about it.)
That's what it's all about: tell your audience whose opinion it is. That's your responsibility.
Most statements imply whose opinion it actually is if you don't qualify them, and it's often not the speaker's.
"I believe he did something illegal." is an opinion. "He did something illegal." is a statement of fact.
If you can't tell the difference, you have a problem.
The two statements say exactly the same thing - you are saying he did something illegal. Whether he did or did not do something illegal is not a question of opinion, but a question of fact.
http://w2.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-defamation.php
Can my opinion be defamatory?
No - but merely labeling a statement as your "opinion" does not make it so. Courts look at whether a reasonable reader or listener could understand the statement as asserting a statement of verifiable fact. (A verifiable fact is one capable of being proven true or false.) This is determined in light of the context of the statement. A few courts have said that statements made in the context of an Internet bulletin board or chat room are highly likely to be opinions or hyperbole, but they do look at the remark in context to see if it's likely to be seen as a true, even if controversial, opinion ("I really hate George Lucas' new movie") rather than an assertion of fact dressed up as an opinion ("It's my opinion that Trinity is the hacker who broke into the IRS database").
The last story indicates how backwards that district is, but the first story shows so many crimes being committed by the police themselves. I remember back in the late 80's, that a story surfaced about the New Orlean police. The feds had JUST shut them down. The reason is that the police chief was going to have a witness murdered to keep him from talking (they had no idea how close the fed were). In fact, the feds had figured out that several other murders by the police had taken place to prevent the feds, so they took this one serious. What was more amazing is that this made the front page and then disappeared from the press the next day. That alone indicates how much control there is over the press.
But taking a side note, this blog really shows that news papers are doomed shortly. It really is important that blogs like this continue. I mean, if news papers were doing their jobs, this would be in the news. The fact that it is not, shows that even when a story is there, they ignore it.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
This is not about embarassment. The top story shows that some top ppl within the police are criminals. The least crime was a cover-up, and aiding/abeting. It is probably a great deal more. As such, this site is about to cause either the state or possibly the feds to come in (not likely the feds with our current admin).
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I looked at it, and I don't see anything that is convincing that this is an "outing" or truthful vs. possible libel.
...of a joke going over over a mime's head?
dear god, is it even possible for people to bring up memphis without bringing up race. i live in memphis and i have my whole life, and every time something happens it has to be about race. this issue has absolutly nothing to do with race what so ever. this is at its most basic level a guy who's feelings have been hurt and is spending our money to make himself feel better. it has nothing to do with his race or the race of the bloggers.
I think you should be modded flamebait instead of interesting. While your post IS interesting, it isn't for the right reasons. You are flamebaiting liberals and you don't really make much sense. Let me explain...
The first problem with your post is that you haven't even seen the blog in question. I am assuming this is the case since you use words like "if" when you describe the grammar and spelling. So you are just guessing at this point which is kind of strange. Also, you are stereotyping that white people can spell and black people can't. I guess I don't really have that stereotype in my head, but let's assume that that is accurate and the stereotype exists for some statistically significant reasoning. I could counter that stereotype by saying that most of the cops I know don't really care about their spelling or grammar regardless of their race so I fail to see how that would be so telling to you.
What's even more interesting to me is that you then post a story that has less to do with race and more to do with poverty. Did the public housing have a majority black population? Probably. But the section8 people all had poverty in common, not race. A black doctor living in a neighborhood is probably not going to cause the crime rate to go up in that area.
So, from all this I think you are probably racist. That's a harsh word to throw out there but that is the only reason I would think that you would associate race with your quoted article and also jump to conclusion about the Slashdot article without even seeing the blog.
As far as the liberal jab goes...what you wrote didn't bother me at all. Liberals see poverty as a large problem and are actually trying to address it. The section8 projects sounds like it didn't solve the problem (I don't know this for sure since we don't know if the overall crime rate went down or if crime went from being more concentrated to being more distributed). The crime rate may have gone up in new areas, but maybe those kids had a chance at a better education and it actually improved things overall. At least people are attempting to solve the problem. Republicans just want to help the rich because this supposedly passes the wealth on down to everyone else since they crate jobs etc etc trickle down economics garbage. Unfortunately that just tends to concentrate wealth and cause more poverty. And as the wealth becomes more concentrated at the top, there is less money for the middle and lower class to purchase with, thus harming an American's buying power and his/her ability to shop thus harming the economy. This stuff can be argued back and forth, but that is another side of that argument. I think having some rational social programs is humane and beneficial to the economy. To try to help and fail is better than to not try at all (as long as we are trying to learn and improve). Republicans (neo-cons) are a complete failure since they don't even hold to their conservative mantra. They just borrow and spend which is worse than any liberal Dem would do. I wouldn't mind Republicans if they actually cut spending and reduced taxation as it would help my bottom line. But they don't do that and just put us in huge deficits. So I have to be for the Dems. The redistribution of wealth (as inefficient as it is) is better than throwing the money in to stupid wars and a rising deficit. Hopefully the Republicans can find their conservative roots again...it doesn't seem like the Libertarians will be able to be a factor in this election where it seems like the true conservatism still lives. (wow, that went way out there but at least it has plenty of topics to discuss!)
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
I know this won't go down well with the libs at Slashdot, but Godwin is an African-American:
So are several million other people. So what?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."