truly "undercover" he would never have been identified and busted.
Posted on 09/22/2022 6:33:19 PM PDT by algore
Pierce County Superior Court has charged a 21-year-old man with felony cyber harassment for revealing the identity of an undercover Tacoma police detective on Instagram, according to the Tacoma News Tribune.
The Gee and Ursula Show asks whether First Amendment protections to the freedom of speech should exempt the accused from charges.
After spotting the officer at a street racing event, the 21-year-old man allegedly exposed the detective’s face, vehicle, and license plate.
The two had a previous connection: the officer testified against the defendant in a DUI and reckless driving case the year before.
“I’m sorry, undercover detective, that you happen to be the same person who testified against someone in a trial earlier that year, and then you chose to go out and congregate with the same group of people in a different capacity in your job,” producer Andrew “Chef” Lanier said.
“This is a free speech issue. To me, this is not an implicit threat against someone you are in public. It is your right as a citizen to photograph and take video or audio of anyone that you want in public. I’m sorry that you lost the game and you were outed. But this is not an implicit threat. This is a limiting of free speech.”
Chef made the point that exposing the identity of the cop is analogous to reporting highway speed traps on Google Maps or Waze, information that is publicly available through reporting to online platforms
They'll run you over like road kill.
Know your jurisdiction.
Cops lost any sympathy from me when they did not stop PANTIESINAWADFA or Burn-Loot-Mjrder. Defund them and make them forfeit their pensions
Is this guy protected by the First Amendment? Absolutely yes. Did his actions hinder the police officer? Again, absolutely yes.
The 1A wins this contest, as I see it.
As a side note to those who might disagree: Progressives try to minimize the 1A by saying that “hate speech” shouldn’t be protected. Or “fake news” shouldn’t be protected, etc. It’s a slippery slope. Once you start on that path, full censorship isn’t that far behind.
It seems it’s incumbent on the cop to keep his covert identity covert, not for some other guy to do it.
I know some people who work at times in a covert capacity.
I’d never put them. I don’t even use their name when I’m speaking with them and hope that if I saw them in public I’d try not to alert on them
I support your analysis.
It has to win, otherwise citizens will never have nonviolent legal ways to expose a corrupt police state.
I believe one of the primary freedoms guaranteed under the first amendments is a citizens right to discuss how his tax dollars being spent. If that amounts to outing a cop, so be it
I’m no DOJ lawyer, but if cops can entrap you into going along with their scheme to kidnap a sitting governor by lying to you outing them is fair play.
I don’t see the crime here. May be inconvenient for the officer, and the police department which needs to how to send someone else.
There are thousands of cops who wear name tags and uniforms so outing this particular officer is unfortunate, but I would advise this young man to drive verrrry carefully.
Sorry.
If Hillary was allowed to be grossly negligent with the documents on our spies...no one should be prosecuted After that???.
I agree that we can out cops. They love to use undercover actions to entrap innocent people by inciting them to cross the line into an act that can be construed as criminal. Undercover cops are only there to help create crime.
The person had a 6th amendment protection to face his accusers in a public trial in front of a jury of his peers. If the officer testified in public against him, that was a public record and the defendant had every right to speak about it.
Turn the question around. What if it were a juror who recognized the officer and spoke out? What then?
-PJ
>> Is revealing the identity of undercover cops a freedom of speech issue?
absolutely not — never a necessity to doxx anyone — don’t do it
better to cut off the head of the snake
>> to face his accuser
absolutely, but not uncommon to seal proceedings & disclosures.
The issue concerns systemic corruption. And we tend to avoid that problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.