PDA

View Full Version : Blogging about cops? Go to Jail.




Anti Federalist
08-12-2009, 10:16 PM
'Uh-Oh They're Here'

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/09/AR2009080902126.html

A persistent blogger annoys police -- and winds up in jail.

Monday, August 10, 2009

A 34-YEAR-OLD woman, the mother of a 12-year-old girl, has been locked up in a Virginia jail for three weeks and could remain there for at least another month. Her crime? Blogging about the police.

Elisha Strom, who appears unable to make the $750 bail, was arrested outside Charlottesville on July 16 when police raided her house, confiscating notebooks, computers and camera equipment. Although the Charlottesville police chief, Timothy J. Longo Sr., had previously written to Ms. Strom warning her that her blog posts were interfering with the work of a local drug enforcement task force, she was not charged with obstruction of justice or any similar offense. Rather, she was indicted on a single count of identifying a police officer with intent to harass, a felony under state law.

It's fair to say that Ms. Strom was unusually focused on the Jefferson Area Drug Enforcement task force, a 14-year-old unit drawn mainly from the police departments of Charlottesville, Albemarle County and the University of Virginia. (Her blog at http://iheartejade.blogspot.com, expresses the view that the task force is "nothing more than a group of arrogant thugs.") In a nearly year-long barrage of blog posts, she published snapshots she took in public of many or most of the task force's officers; detailed their comings and goings by following them in her car; mused about their habits and looks; hinted that she may have had a personal relationship with one of them; and, in one instance, reported that she had tipped off a local newspaper about their movements.


Predictably, this annoyed law enforcement officials, who, it's fair to guess, comprised much of her readership before her arrest. But what seems to have sent them over the edge -- and skewed their judgment -- is Ms. Strom's decision to post the name and address of one of the officers with a street-view photo of his house.

All this information was publicly available, including the photograph, which Ms. Strom gleaned from municipal records. The task force's officers may have worked undercover on occasion, but one wonders about their undercover abilities, given that Ms. Strom was able to out them so consistently. Chief Longo warned Ms. Strom that her blog posts were scaring off informants and endangering the officers and their families, but he provided no evidence. At no point did Ms. Strom's blog express a threat, explicit or otherwise, to police or their sources.

Ms. Strom is not the most sympathetic symbol of free-speech rights. She has previously advocated creating a separate, all-white nation, and her blog veers from the whimsical to the self-righteous to the bizarre. But the real problem here is the Virginia statute, in which an overly broad, ill-defined ban on harassment-by-identification, specifically in regard to police officers, seems to criminalize just about anything that might irritate targets.

It should not be a crime to annoy the cops, whose raid on Ms. Strom's house looks more like a fit of pique than an act of law enforcement. Some of her postings may have consisted of obnoxious speech, but they were nonetheless speech and constitutionally protected. That would hold true right up through her last blog post, written as the police raid on her home began at 7 a.m.: "Uh-Oh They're Here."

Freedom 4 all
08-12-2009, 11:01 PM
Seems like they proved their title of "arrogant thugs" pretty well.

BlackTerrel
08-13-2009, 02:43 AM
Honestly blogging about undercover cops. Not the brightest thing in the world.


Ms. Strom is not the most sympathetic symbol of free-speech rights. She has previously advocated creating a separate, all-white nation, and her blog veers from the whimsical to the self-righteous to the bizarre. But the real problem here is the Virginia statute, in which an overly broad, ill-defined ban on harassment-by-identification, specifically in regard to police officers, seems to criminalize just about anything that might irritate targets.

She was also married to one of the most well known white supremacists in the country who I believe was at one point arrested for kiddie porn. Sweet lady.

Spot the Fed
08-13-2009, 04:46 AM
On the job=on the record. Cops give up their privacy when they sign up for the badge.

Cowlesy
08-13-2009, 06:00 AM
Honestly blogging about undercover cops. Not the brightest thing in the world.



She was also married to one of the most well known white supremacists in the country who I believe was at one point arrested for kiddie porn. Sweet lady.

Since you are going to cherry-pick the paragraph in the article that identifies her as a bigot, I'm going to cherry-pick the paragraph that is important to civil rights.


It should not be a crime to annoy the cops, whose raid on Ms. Strom's house looks more like a fit of pique than an act of law enforcement. Some of her postings may have consisted of obnoxious speech, but they were nonetheless speech and constitutionally protected. That would hold true right up through her last blog post, written as the police raid on her home began at 7 a.m.: "Uh-Oh They're Here."

Even though this lady is an obnoxious bigot, there is a reason we have a Bill of Rights, and a reason the First Amendment is what it is..and not the 8th or 9th Amendment.

Anti Federalist
08-13-2009, 08:34 AM
Even though this lady is an obnoxious bigot, there is a reason we have a Bill of Rights, and a reason the First Amendment is what it is..and not the 8th or 9th Amendment.

Exactly why I posted that.

Defending rights are easy when it's a clear cut case, with "sympathetic" victims of state abuse.

You'll separate the wheat from the chaff when the victim is not so sympathetic or maybe even reprehensible.

Like, ohh, the type of fellow Rodney King turned out to be, for example.

BlackTerrel
08-13-2009, 01:00 PM
Even though this lady is an obnoxious bigot, there is a reason we have a Bill of Rights, and a reason the First Amendment is what it is..and not the 8th or 9th Amendment.

She wasn't arrested for being an obnoxious bigot, but that does speak to her character.

There's only so much evidence to go on. All I know is what you posted. She was posting the names and addresses of cops who work undercover. Sounds like she wanted trouble.

acptulsa
08-13-2009, 01:08 PM
Sounds like she wanted trouble.

I don't think this is a felony now...

Right is right and that's that--and locking her up as a felon for telling true things about the local police department is not right. Now, I admit they need some room to maneuver. But if they put all this info on the 'web about their forces, and she merely assembled them into a digest, then the problem is internal to that department, not her.

I'm honestly surprised to hear you talk like this, Terrel. Once upon a time, anyone of color who walked by a white woman without carefully and conscientiously keeping his eyes on the pavement was said to be 'lookin' fer trouble'. And I don't agree with them any more than I agree with you. Sorry.

Suffice to say I would fight either on the exact same principle. People should be free. All of us.

TonySutton
08-13-2009, 01:43 PM
They should hire the lady to work for them. She seems to be much better at investigation than they are :P

BlackTerrel
08-13-2009, 07:20 PM
I don't think this is a felony now...

Right is right and that's that--and locking her up as a felon for telling true things about the local police department is not right. Now, I admit they need some room to maneuver. But if they put all this info on the 'web about their forces, and she merely assembled them into a digest, then the problem is internal to that department, not her.

I'm honestly surprised to hear you talk like this, Terrel. Once upon a time, anyone of color who walked by a white woman without carefully and conscientiously keeping his eyes on the pavement was said to be 'lookin' fer trouble'. And I don't agree with them any more than I agree with you. Sorry.

Suffice to say I would fight either on the exact same principle. People should be free. All of us.

You're right. I read a little more about this (gotta love Google) and she was definitely within her rights. I let my own feelings about her political views cloud my judgment and was wrong to do so. Simply because someone is an idiot doesn't (or shouldn't) give cops carte blanche.

pcosmar
08-13-2009, 07:25 PM
You're right. I read a little more about this (gotta love Google) and she was definitely within her rights. I let my own feelings about her political views cloud my judgment and was wrong to do so. Simply because someone is an idiot doesn't (or shouldn't) give cops carte blanche.

:D:D
Now that's something we can have a beer on. ;)

Matt Collins
08-13-2009, 07:32 PM
http://www.propsunlimited.com/pics/Games%20-%20Go%20to%20Jail.jpg

BlackTerrel
08-14-2009, 03:21 AM
:D:D
Now that's something we can have a beer on. ;)

As long as you don't drink non-alcoholic beer like that girly man Joe Biden I am game.

Objectivist
08-14-2009, 04:10 AM
Honestly blogging about undercover cops. Not the brightest thing in the world.



She was also married to one of the most well known white supremacists in the country who I believe was at one point arrested for kiddie porn. Sweet lady.

Sure it is when they engage in immoral behavior, like putting people in prison for being free thinkers.