Why does the “public safety editor” think it’s ok to publish enough information to identify these jurors?
— NH (@TwoQuoque) April 20, 2021
Posted on 04/20/2021 6:08:04 PM PDT by CharlesOConnell
Minneapolis Star-Tribune reporters divulged everything about jurors in the Chavin case short of their names and addresses. It is said by those with knowledge about how proprietary, personal information is improperly released in public--doxxing--that this act constituted clear, civil intimidation.
The right to exercise one's jury duty without fear of retribution is a key civil right akin to privacy in the right to vote.
My Mother suffered for exercising her right to vote. In Chicago of the early 1930s, she was given a ride to a polling place by an employee of the local political machine. Ballots were not sufficiently secret, in that one had to ask for a Democratic or a Republican ballot, clearly identifiable by those without need to know. The young man abandoned my Mother on the way back.
This right to civil privacy is similar to the right to decline to identify your sexual preference--NOYDB, none of your damn business. Failure to respond to the question is liable to become effectively a civil crime, subject to punishment or informal persecution.
Imagine if you weren't allowed to have privacy in a public bathroom stall, or if a stranger could come into the bathroom of your home without your having any ability to prevent it?
Some rights necessarily involve privacy. Privacy is proper to their very exercise. A Justice Department on the side of the American people would prosecute the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reporters, Paul Walsh, Hannah Sayle and Abby Simone, who don't have a reasonable expectation of immunity for their violation of American jurors' right to privacy in the exercise of their civil office.
Without naming the jurors, reporters Paul Walsh and Hannah Sayle on Tuesday published enough details about their lives, internet sleuths and local snoops may be able to figure out who they are.
Walsh is a general assignment reporter at the Star-Tribune, and Sayle is a digital features editor. Online critics are accusing the paper of trying to intimidate the jurors into reaching a guilty verdict.
The reporters provided general information about the jurors’ ages, race, professions, where they’re from, and where they went to school. They even leaked that one juror is related to an area police officer.
Abby Simone, the “public safety” editor for the Star-Tribune, shared the story on Twitter.
“Why does the “public safety editor” think it’s ok to publish enough information to identify these jurors?” asked one Twitter user.
Why does the “public safety editor” think it’s ok to publish enough information to identify these jurors?
— NH (@TwoQuoque) April 20, 2021
Some Twitter users like former Trump Campaign advisor Steve Cortes and conservative journalist Rachel Bovard argued that the article was clearly designed to intimidate the jury.
Pure intimidation tactics.
The corporate media is the enemy of the people. https://t.co/gBZer2bUdu
— Steve Cortes (@CortesSteve) April 20, 2021
This is jury intimidation. https://t.co/Ci3iKIrF0c
— Rachel Bovard (@rachelbovard) April 20, 2021
“Why are you making it easier to dox, harass, and threaten jurors?” asked Geoffrey Miller, a psychology professor. “Do you want the mob to come for them? Do you have no journalistic integrity?”
“This is juror intimidation and this trial has been destroyed,” tweeted actor Nick Searcy.
“I’m not sure the reason for this other than intimidation. Imagine being a family member of one of these jurors and the fear they must feel even before a verdict is given. Just a vile thing to play into,” tweeted Papa de Stevie.
Others worried that jurors who are doxed could be harmed by a social justice mob.
“Holy crap. ARE YOU INSANE? When one of these juror dies at the hands of an angry mob, I hope you’re willing to take responsibility for your part in doxxing them.
This is despicable,” said @junebotprolly.
Conservative commentator Kira Davis pointed out Twitter’s hypocrisy for allowing the Star-Tribune’s tweet while banning tweets linking to stories about Black Lives Matter magnate Patrice Cullors’ houses.
“What in the absolute f***? But outlets are being banned from sharing the #patricecullors story bc the name of the town she bought a house included?” Davis tweeted. “@TwitterSafety this seems rather UNSAFE, according to your rules.”
Newsmax host Heather Childers tweeted out a question to “legal minded experts” on the platform. “How is this allowed?” she asked. “Clearly enough information to identify the jurors in the Chauvin trial. Could this not be used as juror intimidation? Does this add to grounds for appeal, etc?”
Countless Twitter users echoed former President Trump’s assertion that the media is “the enemy of the people.”
And one conservative commentator promised retribution.
I will track down and publish the information of any journalist who doxxes one of those jurors. That’s a promise.
— Jesse Kelly (@JesseKellyDC) April 20, 2021
Bet this trial will be overturned and a new one somewhere else.
None of the jurors wanted to be targeted by Burn Loot Murder.
CHauvin never stood a chance.
In the alternative, the reporters can be doxed and tracked.
The bio info has been available since potential jurors were originally interviewed (voir dire). All of this info and process were aired live on Court TV.
“Burn Loot Murder”
“Burn Loot Murder”? Oh yeah the BLM. I call it “Bowel Movement”.
There is so much wrong with this trial and verdict that it stinks to high heaven.
How soon before the first juror sees a million dollar payoof from a book publisher or Netflix filmmaker?
I appreciate your optimism that the justice system isn’t entirely corrupt. I wish I could share it.
It was not a fair trial. I predict he will win on appeal.
I wonder how many police will retire or resign after this?
“I wonder how many police will retire or resign after this?”
Many of the bad ones.
Of course the Strib reporters wanted the mob to attack any juror who voted to acquit. As for journalistic integrity -- you have got to be joking.
All of them that have good sense - at least in the hell-hole jurisdictions.
The only other option is to stay of the force, collect the pay, and stop any policing action. Don't see anything; don't hear anything; don't do anything.
But no respectable police officer will do that when there are still jurisdictions looking for valiant police. Florida has some great smaller cities and a great Governor.
It will definitely be overturned on appeal.
MSM needs to be sued for malpractice.
“In the alternative, the reporters can be doxed and tracked.”
Forget that. We already know where they work. The newspaper should be put out of business permanently.
Which is exactly why an appeal with a judge will overturn the verdict.
The Star-Tribune is known around here as the Star and Sickle.
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.