Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 03/01/2009 4:50:47 AM PST by Man50D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Man50D

The judge is an idiot and should be thrown off the case and lose his position as judge. Censor that you f’ing jerk!


2 posted on 03/01/2009 4:54:23 AM PST by Crazieman (Feb 7, 2008 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1966675/posts?page=28#28)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D
I'm sure the judge doesn't want the gruesome details of this horrific crime to be public and widespread knowledge.....people might get enlightened.

..therefore, he proposes to suppress the truth.

3 posted on 03/01/2009 4:57:36 AM PST by Guenevere ("He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain that which he cannot lose")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D

Maybe the judge should spend a little time surfing the internet for some education.

The plethora of filth, hate, and desensitizing gore is nothing less than shocking and shameful.

If there is to be *ANY* censorship of the internet, it should start with incitements to murder and genocide, gratuitous sexual content, and “snuff” videos, including those posted by the Jihadi savages.


5 posted on 03/01/2009 4:59:40 AM PST by Westbrook (Having more children does not divide your love, it multiplies it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D

Remember, this is the case that forever established the principle that white people can not be the victims of hate crimes.


6 posted on 03/01/2009 4:59:46 AM PST by NavVet ( If you don't defend Conservatism in the Primaries, you won't have it to defend in November)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D
A judge in one of the nation's most brutal carjacking and murder cases has openly questioned in court whether news websites – such as those covering his trial – should be permitted to allow open and anonymous "comments" sections at the bottom of Internet-posted stories.

So here are my questions for the judge:

1. What's the operative law or legal precedent, if any, that would warrant control of verbal commentary?

2. What's the compelling state interest, if any, in controlling such commentary?

It seems to me that the private-property argument mitigates for a free-speech interpretation, rather than against it.

7 posted on 03/01/2009 5:05:28 AM PST by Oberon (What does it take to make government shrink?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D
"This is not the Internet. This is a site created by you in which you invite comments,"

Huh?

9 posted on 03/01/2009 5:07:16 AM PST by milestogo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D

If the cities ignite, will Obama’s 9/08 “get in their face” command mean anything?


11 posted on 03/01/2009 5:11:02 AM PST by polymuser (Wake up, America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D

This isn’t so cut and dried. I think cases like these need to be viewed, cases by case.

More from the article:

The legal wrangling is part of the trial of five suspects charged in the January 2007 carjacking, rape and murder of Channon Christian, 21, and her boyfriend, Christopher Newsom, 23, in Knoxville, Tenn.

As WND reported, five defendants face nearly 50 counts of kidnapping, robbery, gang-rape, murder and theft charges after Christian and Newsom were abducted, assaulted and tortured repeatedly over a period – probably of days – before being shot and killed.

Details in the aftermath of the slayings were not widely released, leading to a flurry of speculation – much of it unfounded – on the grisly details of the crime.

Internet “comment” sections also became a hotbed of discussion with particularly racial themes, as the victims were white and alleged perpetrators black.

Allowing anonymous, irresponsible comments to be published online, the petition argues, contaminates the jury and violates defendant’s Sixth Amendment rights to a fair trial.

An attorney for WBIR-TV, which along with the News Sentinel is specifically named in the petition, argued that the “comments” sections of their websites constitute a “giant bulletin board,” and as such is protected by the First Amendment.


This is a perfect example showing how sometimes protecting the rights of one group can infringe upon the rights of another.


12 posted on 03/01/2009 5:14:34 AM PST by Netizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D

What if we didn’t have the internet? What if people sent post cards through the mail to each other about the case? Would he want the cards screened?


13 posted on 03/01/2009 5:17:02 AM PST by Dallas59 ("You know the one with the big ears? He might be yours, but he ain't my president.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D

The judge is afraid the jurors will be influenced by the TRUTH! Judge and defense attorney: There is no Constitutional right for the accused to have STUPID, IGNORANT jurors!


16 posted on 03/01/2009 5:27:39 AM PST by 2harddrive (...House a TOTAL Loss.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D

Hey, where’s Jesse and Al? Oh yea—that’s only perceived white on black injustice like Duke La Crosse players. If any black thugs maime and kill whites, it’s just an ordinary crime by boyz in the hood who were misunderstood. I’m sick of this crap.


17 posted on 03/01/2009 5:33:16 AM PST by freeangel ( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like what you say))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D

TOR
http://www.torproject.org/


20 posted on 03/01/2009 5:35:52 AM PST by Bobalu (McCain has been proven to be the rino flop I always thought he was.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D

So is the judge asking for a cut?


33 posted on 03/01/2009 7:41:48 AM PST by Oldpuppymax (AGENDA OF THE LEFT EXPOSED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D

My first reaction to this is that the judge (through his years of experience) knows that the public are going to be very angry at the outcome of this trial. He’s just trying to avoid any bad publicity himself for his own conduct.

I myself suspect that the so called ‘perpetrators’ will be found guilty of a few of the charges and will be sentenced to entire weekends in the county jail for the next 3 years.


37 posted on 03/01/2009 8:06:30 AM PST by Balding_Eagle (If Liberals would pay their taxes, there would be no deficit..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Man50D
Be very leery of any man who demands to be addressed as "Your Honor". That required addressing in court should be removed from every court room in the United States. Who is serving who? Honor left the Tennessee Court Rooms decades ago.

Most Tennessee county court houses have judges who came from the one or two prevailing law firms in the county seat. As such they remain on bench as judge till they are too senile to find their way back to the court house anymore. Don't look for truth there because they don't want to hear it or will have a more pressing public event to attend elsewhere. Telling truth in a Tennessee Court can find you in contempt faster than you can spit. The High Dollar Shyster Lawyers whom most Judges worship make a moockery of justice and truth as well.

Tennessee Courts and Lawyers are also known for fiasco's they let go on for years like Zoo Man. Judge and Lawyers media grandstanding for years on end and justice never served. I pray never again have to see any court room in my state again for any reason.

41 posted on 03/01/2009 5:45:33 PM PST by cva66snipe ($.01 The current difference between the DEM's and GOP as well as their combined worth to this nation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson