Skip to comments.S-R must provide info on anonymous commenter (Idaho)
Posted on 07/11/2012 4:00:47 PM PDT by Ken H
The Spokesman-Review must provide information that could identify an anonymous reader who typed a disparaging online comment about the chairwoman of the Kootenai County Republican Party in February, an Idaho judge ruled Tuesday.
The attorney for the chairwoman, Tina Jacobson, subpoenaed information about the identities of three Huckleberries Online readers who commented under assumed names below a photograph featuring Jacobson.
Under the name almostinnocentbystander, the commenter questioned whether $10,000 reportedly missing from the Kootenai County Central Committee might be stuffed inside Tinas blouse.
Two other commenters, Phaedrus and outofstatetater, also typed comments responding to the original post about Jacobsons blouse.
The comments were deleted from Huckleberries Online after S-R blogger Dave Oliveria discovered them, but the first post was visible for about 2 ½ hours.
In late April, Jacobson filed a lawsuit against John and/or Jane Doe. Her attorney, C. Matthew Andersen, subpoenaed the names of the commenters so the suit could proceed, and the newspaper responded with a motion to quash that request.
(Excerpt) Read more at spokesman.com ...
I looked around a bit, but didn’t find an exact quote of the comment in question.
Whoever "almostinnocent" is, she or he posted the comment, "Is that the missing $10,000 from Kootenai County Central Committee funds actually stuffed inside Tina's blouse??? Let's not try to find out."
Let’s hope these types of politicians never turn their attention to FR, plenty of us have said a lot worse on here....
1) She’s a public figure, and
2) Political speech is the most protected class of free speech.
In this case, the assumption must be that she has political power, and those that libeled her do not. While this does not assert that she would use her political power against these persons, it does mean that there must be a very high bar for libel when speech is critical about actions in office, even if those actions are unrelated to their job and have no basis in fact.
If that is the actual comment...why must they be outed?
We had a Prince George's County MD board member try to flush a large check down the toilet, and her husband, the chairman of the board, called her from the office (just before he was raided) to get rid of it.
Is there some reason this woman is above suspicion?
Sounds like a defense lawyer trying to get folks to go on a wild goose chase for incidentals when the main issue is who got the bucks!
Oh goody, the congress will get to create ‘internet courts’ soon.
Yes, requiring people to travel long distances to physically defend statements made on the internet is a real and very severe infringement of the First Amendment.
So congress critters get to appoint their and their donors bum in-laws and other ne’er do wells to the judiciary to try the cases electronically- in the venue where they occured.
Take Back Idaho's 1st Congressional District, Otter for Idaho, I AM THE TEA PARTY!, Rush Limbaugh, Labrador for Idaho, Keep Idaho Red
This is very scary. We get closer to becoming the Soviet Union or Communist China with each passing day.
I’ll bet she barks when she hears the doorbell!
she’s a republican
So what? Stupidity does not recognize political affiliations.
she’s attempting to end internet harrassment, and posters on this thread attack her looks and intelligence.
what i was pointing out was your horrible treatment of a woman because of her looks, not her policies...
you are the moron, in your behavior and assumptions. i feel sorry for you and your impotent mind.
thanks for the blinking moniker. i liked that.
Get a life you loser.
She runs to the kitchen whenever she hears the can opener.
Her ass is so large, it has it’s own zip code.
Organizations such as the SR should keep their logs in memory and reboot every morning.
What are the chances if the commenter works for ABC?
What are the chances the commenter works for ABC?