Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 484 posts

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#261

Post by random314 »

rayiner wrote: post #253
RickJWagner wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO, it's been an escalation of tit-for-tat from both sides of the aisle. News sources, 'Community organizers', corporate activists, religious leaders etc. have all been increasingly brazen as they take increasingly polarized positions to counter actions from the other side. What's missing is common decency and sympathy for the other person's point of view. We won't find it by clinging to our own political party or…

Exactly. It's tit-for-tat. Moderate Democrats won't push back against the "community organizers" when they push highly questionable practices such as ballot harvesting or allowing ballots to be counted that arrive days after election day. Moderate Democrats also never pushed back on two decades of claims about election fraud and stolen elections from the likes of people like Terry McAuliffe and Stacey Abrams: https:/…

Ultimately, it is almost always the fault of Democrats- whether it is fake electoral fraud allegations, gerrymandering and voter disenfranchisement. Stacey Abrams and fauci are the true villains here. /s

Btw, electoral fraud via voter disenfranchisement is a well established reality. Voter disenfranchisement has been a Republican tactic for decades that Democrats are finally fighting against. Yes, this is fraud - which is why Republicans are now upset that their fraud is being shut down by Stacey Abrams. Georgia already proved this.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#262

Post by [deleted] »

RickJWagner wrote: post #225
alistairSH wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GOP has the majority of state governors. GOP has the majority of state legislatures. Both of the above are currently drawing Congressional districts based on the latest census data. Both of the above are currently rolling out voting rules that are nominally about preventing fraud (of which there is zero evidence of anything widespread) but will impact the ability of people to vote.

Conservative voter here. I'll gladly trade you the state-level advantages held by the GOP for the national media machine controlled by the Dems. I think the media is the most powerful over the long haul.

[deleted]

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#263

Post by vageli »

dragonwriter wrote: post #194
kodah wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California has the same law as Florida. Edit: the laws are the same, and you can't use an illegal recording in a court -- expressly. If you try to give an illegal recording to the news you'll likely get taken in civil court.

In California a recording without required consent is a crime when made . Intended use doesn't play into that. It is also separately prohibit from use as evidence in court except as evidence of violation of the law prohibiting such recording itself. > If you wanted to play it on the news, however, you're still free to do that as far as I know. Sure, if you want to advertise the crime you committed on the news you are…

This article [0] states the contrary: the recording _can_ be used as evidence in a criminal trial, but it seems the actual act of recording it is still criminal as a separate matter.

> Posted: Dec 5, 2019 / 05:44 PM PST / Updated: Dec 5, 2019 / 05:44 PM PST Secretly recording someone else’s conversation is illegal in California, but prosecutors can use the illicit recording as evidence in a criminal case, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

> In their unanimous ruling, the justices cited a 1982 ballot measure passed by voters that allows all “relevant evidence” to be introduced in any criminal trial or pretrial hearing, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

> The case at hand concerned a private phone call about the actions of an alleged child molester. While the conversation was confidential under state law, its contents were clearly relevant and were properly disclosed to the jury in the molesting case, the court said.

> The ruling follows a line of cases that narrowed criminal defendants’ rights after the 1982 ballot measure, which sponsors dubbed the Victims’ Bill of Rights, the Chronicle said. The measure included provisions that increased sentences, narrowed the insanity defense, allowed victims to testify at parole and sentencing hearings and let prosecutors introduce evidence that had been obtained in violation of state law.

> The court also rejected defense arguments that admission of secretly recorded evidence would violate the right to privacy in the California Constitution. Those who are harmed by the recordings can still sue for damages, the eavesdroppers can be prosecuted, and the evidence remains inadmissible in non-criminal cases, Cantil-Sakauye said.

[0]: https://ktla.com/news/local-news/its-illegal-to-secretly-rec...

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#264

Post by Loughla »

R0b0t1 wrote: post #252
Loughla wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except if the recording is illegal, it can be used, in some states, against you criminally and civilly. I was just having this conversation. You can be sued and/or jailed if you record someone without their consent in a two party consent state. Not saying it's right or wrong, but it exists and is something to think about.

The main concern (and it's not much of a concern) is that you are charged with wiretapping or the equivalent. The penalties for this are not necessarily severe. Refuse to plea and force a trial. If the recording is not tampered with it's unlikely a civil case will get anywhere. If someone is actually a rapist and got off on a technicality it's your moral imperative to do something, no? Stand up to unjust laws. Evil p…

>idiots like you do nothing.

That seems unnecessary ad hominem. Just completely uncalled for.

Also, you're assigning a values judgment to my statements that I genuinely thought I was clear about when I said "Not saying it's right or wrong, but it exists and is something to think about."

You have no idea what my stance is on literally anything. Trying to be superior to someone who has given you nothing to feel superior about seems sort of hateful?

Facts are facts, and consequences are consequences, regardless of right or wrong. That was my meaning. Agree with the outcomes or not, believe me or don't. That doesn't matter.

>If the recording is not tampered with it's unlikely a civil case will get anywhere.

How do you figure? If it is a surreptitious recording without consent, the person who was recorded has a pretty clear line to a civil case.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#265

Post by ceejayoz »

isoskeles wrote: post #224
ceejayoz wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's his mother's fault for not anticipating a policy half a century into the future? Are you prepared to similarly be declared an edge case and not permitted your Constitutional rights?

It's his mother's fault for losing the documentation of his name change. Am I prepared? Yes. I have all my important identity documents locked in a fire safe. If something should happen to them, I'm willing to pay the $250, etc. amount to fix the problem.

That's not what I asked.

I asked if you'd accept "you don't get Constitutional right X because you're an edge case" if it were your edge case and not someone else's.

($250 is, to many on HN, an insignificant amount. To some in the world, it's the sort of expense that'd mean eviction or having to skip your diabetes meds for the week. No one should have to pick between necessary expenses and their right to vote like this.)

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#266

Post by ClumsyPilot »

ModernMech wrote: post #37
elliekelly wrote: post #10

I have a colleague who does environmental litigation. (Think Erin Brockovich.) They have a big civil case against a large energy company in a southern, “energy-friendly” state. They had an expert witness all lined up - a professor at the (public!) state university. Well this expert happened to be up for tenure and was (allegedly) told in no uncertain terms that, should they testify as an expert witness in this case,…

As a professor, I think the actions of The University of Florida are abhorrent. I would never want to work in an environment that kowtows to politics. There are enough political considerations within a University, but having to deal with state politics as well? Count me out. At the same time, he doesn’t have tenure? So they are actually fully within their rights to do this, and really no one should be surprised. But…

"So they are actually fully within their rights to do this"

Its not an offense again thr proffesor, it's an offense against the jistice system. Naivly, I hoped that doing something like this would have serious consequences.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#267

Post by rmah »

useragent86 wrote: post #223
chipotle_coyote wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The criticism is "this is a bad thing the current Republican Party is doing right now in a widespread fashion"; "there are past examples of the Democrats doing this" is not a defense. If it's a bad thing that we should try to stop any party from doing, then right now that means trying to stop the Republicans from doing it. The bad thing we are talking about right now is the Republican Party trying to engineer a de fa…

So the Democratic Party controls both houses of Congress and the White House, and they're trying to pass bills to give the Attorney General control over all federal elections in the country, but you say that it's "the Republican Party trying to engineer a de facto one-party state."

He meant Florida, not the USA.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#268

Post by sterlind »

R0b0t1 wrote: post #252
Loughla wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except if the recording is illegal, it can be used, in some states, against you criminally and civilly. I was just having this conversation. You can be sued and/or jailed if you record someone without their consent in a two party consent state. Not saying it's right or wrong, but it exists and is something to think about.

The main concern (and it's not much of a concern) is that you are charged with wiretapping or the equivalent. The penalties for this are not necessarily severe. Refuse to plea and force a trial. If the recording is not tampered with it's unlikely a civil case will get anywhere. If someone is actually a rapist and got off on a technicality it's your moral imperative to do something, no? Stand up to unjust laws. Evil p…

it's a stretch, but the judge could bar revealing the motive for recording, or playing clips that reveal the nature of what was recorded, in order to keep the jurors from learning that it was child rape and nullifying the charge. in practice it's unlikely though.

also wait, were criminal charges brought against the rape victim for recording? did some prosecutor decide to actively assist further ruining the victim's life? civil I can understand, but what a scumbag for not exercising prosecutorial discretion if so.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#269

Post by OGWhales »

RickJWagner wrote: post #225
alistairSH wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GOP has the majority of state governors. GOP has the majority of state legislatures. Both of the above are currently drawing Congressional districts based on the latest census data. Both of the above are currently rolling out voting rules that are nominally about preventing fraud (of which there is zero evidence of anything widespread) but will impact the ability of people to vote.

Conservative voter here. I'll gladly trade you the state-level advantages held by the GOP for the national media machine controlled by the Dems. I think the media is the most powerful over the long haul.

Conservatives have an extremely powerful media machine too. Some of the most viewed personas on TV and online are conservatives, with the same being true for radio.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#270

Post by ClumsyPilot »

"Three University of Florida professors were denied permission from the school to testify in a major voting rights case "

What the fuck is 'permission to testify'? I thought access to justice was a constitutional right. If you can't get anyone to tesrify, then you have no access to justice.

We have surrendered so many rights in various contracts, we hardly have any freedoms left.

Post reply on HN