3 ms·

Three things: First, the guy could be accused of choking babies to death with child porn and that wouldn't make a damn bit of difference as far as his, and the

Three things: First, the guy could be accused of choking babies to death with child porn and that wouldn't make a damn bit of difference as far as his, and the rest of our, fundamental rights are concerned. Second, accused (or even indicted) is absolutely different than convicted, which itself bears an indirect relationship to 'true'. Third, courts typically don't post private proceedings on the internet - you'd be amazed how many things you wouldn't be able to "find anything" about via a google search. If he's being held for contempt in relation to a case that he's not actually a defendant in, I imagine it'd be really bloody difficult to find a whole lot about that online, and in either case I can't imagine any sane lawyer giving him the green light to post on the internet details about a case for which he's already being held in contempt. But by all means, don't let me stop you from impugning the integrity of a man you admit to knowing nothing at all about.

tzs 15y ago
> I imagine it'd be really bloody difficult to find a whole lot about that online, and in either case I can't imagine any sane lawyer giving him the green light to post on the internet details about a case for which he's already being held in contempt. I can't imagine a lawyer giving him the green light to post on the internet asking people who don't know anything about the case to spam the judge and prosecutor, either. In fact, he states that he doesn't have a lawyer. If he expects people to write letters, he needs to explain WHY they need to write letters. That requires telling us what the case is actually about.
- danielsoneg 15y ago
  That's true. I've no strong opinons on the veracity of the man's claims, but I'm certainly not intending to write any letters without extremely strong and verifiable evidence that his story is as he claims. My point was just that the nature of the charges in the case and our ability to find anything about them have next to no bearing on principles in question, nor does the moral composition of the author, and I think there's danger in the idea that they would.

tzs 15y ago

> I imagine it'd be really bloody difficult to find a whole lot about that online, and in either case I can't imagine any sane lawyer giving him the green light to post on the internet details about a case for which he's already being held in contempt. I can't imagine a lawyer giving him the green light to post on the internet asking people who don't know anything about the case to spam the judge and prosecutor, either. In fact, he states that he doesn't have a lawyer. If he expects people to write letters, he needs to explain WHY they need to write letters. That requires telling us what the case is actually about.

danielsoneg 15y ago
That's true. I've no strong opinons on the veracity of the man's claims, but I'm certainly not intending to write any letters without extremely strong and verifiable evidence that his story is as he claims. My point was just that the nature of the charges in the case and our ability to find anything about them have next to no bearing on principles in question, nor does the moral composition of the author, and I think there's danger in the idea that they would.