Judge threatens anonymity for website 'comments'
We read:
"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. "I'm saying if there is a profit, there is a responsibility that goes with it," said Criminal Court Judge Richard Baumgartner of Knox County, Tenn., to an attorney for the Knoxville News Sentinel. "This is not the Internet. This is a site created by you in which you invite comments," the judge stated. "This is something you control."
Richard Hollow, the newspaper's attorney, argued that a court-imposed policy on the "comments" sections would be an unconstitutional infringement of First Amendment free speech rights. "What the court is asking us to do is . set up a board of censorship," Hollow said.
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.
According to the News Sentinel, defense attorneys argued that the occasionally hostile and racially charged discussions, available online for the world to see, have made it nearly impossible to find jurors anywhere in the state of Tennessee whose minds have not been influenced by the anonymously posted comments.
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....
Thus far, only one of the five defendants charged in connection with the brutal carjacking case has been tried and convicted.
Source
4 comments:
Fine, let's forget our rights for a second and do away with anoynmous comments. What's to stop someone from making a different name?
More importantly, even if you do away with the comments section all together, that still won't stop people from talking about it among themselves.
Besides, as a journalist myself, I would think what is being reported in the actual newspaper would be more damaging than some guy who doesn't want people to know who he is when he gives his two cents worth about this case.
Hey, Judge Baumgartner, screw you pal. - Anonymous
"Around here there is more crime and violence and it comes from the black community. Does speaking the truth make me a racist?"
Around here also Anon-1. And no, a fact can not be racist. It can only make those who wish it not be known uncomfortable, but that's their problem.
It has always amused me to hear race-pimps like Al $harptongue (and others) use the number of blacks in prison as "proof" of racism. Of course, he never mentions the "fact" that blacks commit most of the crimes!
This is a peculiar problem - is it acceptable to curtail First Amendment rights to preserve 5th and 6th???
Surely the only issue is, do the comments prevent the carrying on of a fair trial and the empanelling of an unbiased jury? If yes, then perhaps comments need to be suspended until after trial - if no, then have at it.
Post a Comment