11–20 of 74 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think OP has a valid point.
But it's only tangentially related to the article posted.
Should he be arrested at the next NH primary for his knowingly false statements and their relationship to an actual bomb threat? Probably not, so probably this law is illegal.
This is probably an unpopular opinion, and I'd want to think this through more, but I've been feeling recently that libel laws in the U.S. ought to be stronger. We have a massive problem with propagandists (especially on the right, but also the left) using blatant lies to manipulate opinion. The net result is a huge amount of anger & distrust. The media is a mess. Even mainstream outlets like Fox routinely lie to the…
That being said, misinformation is also a huge problem. So maybe we'll have to find other ways to more effectively hold individuals accountable, whether they're abusing institutional power or spreading misinformation.
This is probably an unpopular opinion, and I'd want to think this through more, but I've been feeling recently that libel laws in the U.S. ought to be stronger. We have a massive problem with propagandists (especially on the right, but also the left) using blatant lies to manipulate opinion. The net result is a huge amount of anger & distrust. The media is a mess. Even mainstream outlets like Fox routinely lie to the…
Think about how hard each of those would be to prove. To prove he knew he was lying would almost require that he admitted it in writing or was recorded admitting it. But for a man like Robert Frese to prove that the police were dirty would be almost impossible, the FBI often has difficulty proving that crooked cops are crooked, and they have a lot more resources than just some guy who trash-talked the police. Requiring Robert Frese to prove himself correct is totally unreasonable. Requiring the prosecution to prove Robert Frese knew he was lying is the only semi-sane approach to criminal libel (the criminality of libel is dubious in the first place.)
If you want stronger libel laws to hold corporations accountable, you need to first stop treating corporations and individuals as the same. Applying the same standard to both will create a situation where either corporations are relatively free to say anything, or create a situation where individuals are crushed under the force of laws designed to be forceful enough to beat corporations into compliance. But until that separation happens, having laws that protect people like Robert Frese is the sane default.
Just because he was arrested for criminal libel doesn't mean he will be convicted of it. The article does a good job of presenting a high level overview of criminal libel: what it is, what the arguments around it are, and so forth. Read the whole thing.
Just because he was arrested for criminal libel doesn't mean he will be convicted of it. The article does a good job of presenting a high level overview of criminal libel: what it is, what the arguments around it are, and so forth. Read the whole thing.
Yea, but the princple remains. He bad mouthed the police so they arrested for it. In a country like the US where it appears that unduly high bails are set. (thousands of dollars for people on welfare may as well be a million) Getting arrested could easily mean the lose of freedom for a extended period of time. If that is the penalty for saying something, true or false. It suddenly becomes something people are afraid…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it's only tangentially related to the article posted.
It seems to get into the impossibility of such a law being at the discretion of law enforcement. Should he be arrested at the next NH primary for his knowingly false statements and their relationship to an actual bomb threat? Probably not, so probably this law is illegal.
Only 23 states have criminal defamation laws. The problems with defamation being criminal is what the article is about.
as a brown guy, i will never have the balls big enough to make comments like this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea, but the princple remains. He bad mouthed the police so they arrested for it. In a country like the US where it appears that unduly high bails are set. (thousands of dollars for people on welfare may as well be a million) Getting arrested could easily mean the lose of freedom for a extended period of time. If that is the penalty for saying something, true or false. It suddenly becomes something people are afraid…
He said an officer is corrupt and that the chief is covering it up. The NYT calls this "disparaging", but it clearly goes way beyond badmouthing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea, but the princple remains. He bad mouthed the police so they arrested for it. In a country like the US where it appears that unduly high bails are set. (thousands of dollars for people on welfare may as well be a million) Getting arrested could easily mean the lose of freedom for a extended period of time. If that is the penalty for saying something, true or false. It suddenly becomes something people are afraid…
He said an officer is corrupt and that the chief is covering it up. The NYT calls this "disparaging", but it clearly goes way beyond badmouthing.