PDA

View Full Version : Fake serial killer appealing conviction - interesting First Amendment case




devil21
03-22-2011, 01:47 AM
Is he a dick? Yes. I don't think he broke any laws and last time I checked, wasting cop's time isn't against the law if you didn't lie directly to them. His First Amendment right to free speech, even if the speech sucks, should be protected.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_serial_killer_hoax


ATLANTA – Andrew Scott Haley used the online moniker "catchmekiller" to post a video claiming he killed 16 people, a callous lie that led investigators down dead-end trails and wasted countless hours of detective work, prosecutors said Monday.

Haley admits what he did was wrong, but believes his free speech rights were trampled during his elaborate attempt to get viewers involved in solving a mystery. He asked the Georgia Supreme Court on Monday to overturn his conviction.

Haley was convicted of tampering with evidence and making false statements after he posted the video on YouTube in February 2009. Once authorities tracked him down, they quickly determined he had nothing to do with the killings.

The video, which obscured his face and voice, purported to offer clues to where bodies were located and urged viewers to help him solve the crime. He promised to reveal his true identify if they played along, but warned "Don't try to chase me."

One of the postings included a reference to Tara Grinstead, who disappeared in 2005 from her home in Ocilla, Ga., in the southern part of the state. He never identified her by name, but prosecutors said he clearly referred to her by citing her background as a teacher and a former beauty queen.

"Who is she? What does she do? You answer me this, and I will give you her body. She was still wearing her favorite pair of jeans but not her beauty queen silk," he said in the video, which also included a fictitious address without an explanation.

Haley also claimed to have information on the unsolved 2006 disappearance of Jennifer Kesse, an Orlando woman whose father received a link to the video from Haley, along with the message: "Maybe I can help."

Haley's defense team asked the court to strike down the law used to charge him with making false statements, claiming it was flawed because it doesn't distinguish between a false statement and a fraudulent one.

Thousands of people across the nation have been charged with a similar federal law, but prosecutors and defense attorneys said Haley's situation appears to be unique because he didn't make the false statements directly to authorities.

"It allows a person to become a felon for making a statement to a friend, who relays it to a friend, who relays it to authorities," said Haley's attorney, Kristin Jordan. "There needs to be some limitations."

Haley was sentenced to two years in a work-release program, and several more years of probation.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation spent hundreds of hours trying to track down the video's maker before finding Haley in Gainesville, Ga. Authorities concluded he had nothing to do with either woman's disappearance, or any killings.

Lee Darragh, an assistant district attorney, said it shouldn't matter whether Haley made the statements directly to investigators. Haley's video was a self-serving lie that confounded investigators, he said.

Far from a free speech debate, Darragh he argued, the case is about "a false statement in a missing person investigation that was being conducted by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation at the time the statement was made."

Working Poor
03-22-2011, 02:54 AM
Sounds like he was a real dumbass to me. Just think how it would be if all the stupid people got locked up for being stupid. Which is basically why this guy is in prison.

BamaAla
03-22-2011, 03:34 AM
Guy is an idiot of the highest order, but hopefully the state's high court will overturn the conviction.

mrsat_98
03-22-2011, 03:59 AM
Guy is an idiot of the highest order, but hopefully the state's high court will overturn the conviction.

The conviction will not be overturned.

liberateliberty
03-22-2011, 04:35 AM
I think this qualifies as screaming FIRE in a theater and causing damage via your lies.

Krugerrand
03-22-2011, 06:28 AM
Haley was convicted of tampering with evidence and making false statements after he posted the video on YouTube in February 2009. Once authorities tracked him down, they quickly determined he had nothing to do with the killings.

I vote for overturning those convictions. However, I'd be willing to consider "interfering with an investigation" charge.

Krugerrand
03-22-2011, 06:30 AM
I think this qualifies as screaming FIRE in a theater and causing damage via your lies.

It might be similar from an ethical standpoint. But, you would not be charged with making false statements for doing that. It's dangerous to allow the "false statements" charges to results in felonies where they should not. There may be valid charges to hold against the man ... but "making false statements" is not one of them.