http://www.starbulletin.com/editorials/20091123
_tread_carefully_with_web_site_of_dui_shame.html
Tread carefully with Web site of DUI shame
POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Nov 23, 2009
The Honolulu Police Department is risking a legal challenge by posting on
the Internet the names and photos of drivers cited but yet to be tried on
drunken driving charges. A partly similar posting by a New York county last
year was found to be unconstitutional, but the brevity of the scheduled HPD
site should put it on stronger legal ground.
HPD plans on Wednesday to launch the site consisting of the names and
photos of people arrested and charged with drunken driving. The photos will
include arrests Nov.15-21 and will remain online for 24 hours. For the next
six months of what amounts to a pilot program, the 24-hour posting will
include those arrested in the preceding Sunday through Saturday.
The police department's Scarlet Letter site, titled "Oahu's Drunk
Drivers," is aimed at discouraging people from taking the risk of being
humiliated even before going to court. The initiative for public safety is
commendable, particularly with the holidays coming. It is a bold -- some
will say brazen -- move to discourage drunken driving.
(snip)
----------------------------------------------
I don't see why this would be illegal when it's routine for the press to
give names and pics of other people who are charged w crimes but not yet
convicted.
Of course, you don't. That's because you're an ignoramus. You hate
drunk drivers, and you can't see past your obsession to reach any
understanding of the law.
I'll explain it here in the hope that the explanation reaches others, who
can separate their judgment from their opinions.
The "New York county" that maintained a DWI website was Nassau County.
Under New York state law, shame in and of itself is not considered a
legally appropriate punishment for someone convicted of a crime. Thus NY
cannot force convicted drunk drivers to have special license plates
identitying from as convicted drunk drivers. In the case of the website,
the drivers hadn't yet been tried. So the website was suspect. In
addition, the stigma of arrest or conviction can rise to a violation of
due process rights if the result is a material changes in one's status.
A threat to one's employment suffices. The appeals court in ruling
against the website noted that it imposed "limitless and eternal
notoriety, without any controls."
Other states will have different standards.
Hey stupid. You still haven't addressed the issue of why it's ok for
the media to shame accused criminals by giving out their name and pic.
Oh, look! An ignoramus calls me stupid.
> You still haven't addressed the issue of why it's ok for
> the media to shame accused criminals by giving out their name and pic.
Because "the media" aren't composed of state agents, you ignoramus.
Damn! Do you really not understand this?
>> I'll explain it here in the hope that the explanation reaches others, who
>> can separate their judgment from their opinions.
>>
>> The "New York county" that maintained a DWI website was Nassau County.
>> Under New York state law, shame in and of itself is not considered a
>> legally appropriate punishment for someone convicted of a crime. Thus NY
>> cannot force convicted drunk drivers to have special license plates
>> identitying from as convicted drunk drivers. =A0In the case of the website,
>> the drivers hadn't yet been tried. =A0So the website was suspect. In
>> addition, the stigma of arrest or conviction can rise to a violation of
>> due process rights if the result is a material changes in one's status.
>> A threat to one's employment suffices. =A0The appeals court in ruling
>> against the website noted that it imposed "limitless and eternal
>> notoriety, without any controls."
>>
>> Other states will have different standards.
>
>Hey stupid.
I've thought of several words to describe Deadrat. Stupid isn't
one of them.
>You still haven't addressed the issue of why it's ok for
>the media to shame accused criminals by giving out their name and pic.
The web site in question is run by government agents and agencies
while a newspaper is not. As such, a newspaper isn't limited in the
way a government run web site would be.
--
Count your blessings by thinking of those whom you love.
In the first place, the media IS composed of state agents but what
difference does it make anyway whether it's a cop or a journalist who
calls you a dui? The dood has been shamed. THINK, you hater.
>
> >Hey stupid.
>
> I've thought of several words to describe Deadrat. Stupid isn't
> one of them.
>
Of course not. You're one of his many aliases as everyone noticed long
ago. HAHA. You really are stupid, aren't you.???
Anyone who defends drunk drivers is not only stupid but a psychopath.
<snip/>
>> > You still haven't addressed the issue of why it's ok for
>> > the media to shame accused criminals by giving out their name and
>> > pic.
>>
>> Because "the media" aren't composed of state agents, you ignoramus.
>>
>
> In the first place, the media IS composed of state agents
In this country, journalists are generally not state employees. Except, of
course, when the previous administration secretly paid journalists to pimp
the administration's policies.
> but what
> difference does it make anyway whether it's a cop or a journalist who
> calls you a dui?
Can you really be this ignorant? Did you miss civics class the day they
explained that our system is based on restricting the state but allowing
individuals freedom? Or did you just cut the class altogether?
> The dood has been shamed.
How about an analogy? Although given your comprehension level, this may be
a fool's errand. Parents can preach to their children; public-school
principals cannot. Are you gonna tell me that it makes no difference
because the children still get preached to?
It's not the result that's the problem; it's the agent.
> THINK, you hater.
As irony meters explode everywhere.
> On Nov 24, 2:22�am, Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:54:51 -0800 (PST), "Speeders & Drunk Drivers
>>
>
>>
>> >Hey stupid.
>>
>> � � I've thought of several words to describe Deadrat. �Stupid isn'
> t
>> one of them.
>>
>
> Of course not. You're one of his many aliases
Hey, Kent! Which one of us does this insult more?
<snip/>
HAHAHA. I knew that would drive you ballistic. I love watching the
loons lose it.
As I expected, a fool's errand, which, of course, makes me the fool. Is
my face red or what?
If you think the analogy has anything to do with your or your silly
hobby, then you might have a learning disability. Get that checked out.