11–20 of 177 posts
This young man appears to be able to go from 0 to 100 very quickly with little self control. I can only imagine the kind of environment that helps create a person like that… It is so sad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. The court handled this quickly and appropriately. I don't see a reason to lose one's privacy.
obviously the question is, are there cases of witness intimidation that aren't being caught?
There is no reason to lose your privacy over this.
> “Um, I’m at a house,” [NAME] said, with hesitation, giving a [STREET NAME] address in [CITY]. This should NOT have been publicized. There is enough information in the above sentence that I was able to Google for her exact address. This is a gross danger to violence victims.
> “Um, I’m at a house,” [NAME] said, with hesitation, giving a [STREET NAME] address in [CITY]. This should NOT have been publicized. There is enough information in the above sentence that I was able to Google for her exact address. This is a gross danger to violence victims.
Even if we could keep the identity of witnesses secret, we don’t want to. We have the right to confront our accusers, and we don’t want secret trials.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. The court handled this quickly and appropriately. I don't see a reason to lose one's privacy.
The court discovered the problem in this instance . Further, the parent provided an alternative suggestion. Another commenter elaborated on that "dedicated platform" idea: A dedicated device.
Zoom is blowing the doors off access, but there is appetite for specialization.
> “Um, I’m at a house,” [NAME] said, with hesitation, giving a [STREET NAME] address in [CITY]. This should NOT have been publicized. There is enough information in the above sentence that I was able to Google for her exact address. This is a gross danger to violence victims.
The other solution seems to be endangering the general public by opening the courts in a pandemic or to start having secret courts. Neither are particularly compelling. Far less people were assaulted in the US than died of coronavirus, and even fewer were assaulted for witness intimidation. And a secret court is obviously bad for a rules based democracy.
You can have remote trials but just don't put personal information in records, and prohibit unauthorized recording. Have one official recording that redacts personal addresses and contact information.
> “Um, I’m at a house,” [NAME] said, with hesitation, giving a [STREET NAME] address in [CITY]. This should NOT have been publicized. There is enough information in the above sentence that I was able to Google for her exact address. This is a gross danger to violence victims.
Transcripts are already public information. The accused obviously already knows where she lives. How does this affect her security? Even if we could keep the identity of witnesses secret, we don’t want to. We have the right to confront our accusers, and we don’t want secret trials.
Now instead of 1 predator knowing where she lives there are a million. Is that good?
Transcripts should redact addresses and contact information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other solution seems to be endangering the general public by opening the courts in a pandemic or to start having secret courts. Neither are particularly compelling. Far less people were assaulted in the US than died of coronavirus, and even fewer were assaulted for witness intimidation. And a secret court is obviously bad for a rules based democracy.
It needn't be one or the other. You can have remote trials but just don't put personal information in records, and prohibit unauthorized recording. Have one official recording that redacts personal addresses and contact information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It needn't be one or the other. You can have remote trials but just don't put personal information in records, and prohibit unauthorized recording. Have one official recording that redacts personal addresses and contact information.
No parr of the justice system should be hidden from view. If its too dangerous to be made public, its not important enough to be used.
That would encourage victims to not bring wrongdoings to trial in fear of their personal info being exposed.
If someone is convicted, then yeah, go ahead and put them on a sex offender registry with their address. Loss of privacy is a consequence of their actions. That's justice.
But goddamn no don't put the victim's address in public view.