Grow some thicker skin, you whiners.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/f-bomb-insult-on-speeding-ticket-is-free-speech-judge-rules/
QuoteF-bomb insult on speeding ticket is free speech, judge rules
WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. -- A village named Liberty must stand trial for arresting a man who wrote curse words on a speeding ticket and a prosecutor is liable for violating his First Amendment rights, a judge has decided.
U.S. District Judge Cathy Seibel in White Plains ruled last week that Willian Barboza's rights were violated when the Fairfield County, Connecticut, resident was arrested on an aggravated-harassment charge three years ago. The New York Civil Liberties Union publicized a transcript of the proceeding Tuesday.
Barboza protested his speeding ticket by writing three curse words on his payment form. The message was an F-bomb insult directed at the village, according to the NYCLU.
He also replaced the village's name, Liberty, with "Tyranny."
The village, 100 miles northwest of New York City, refused to let him pay by mail after one of its clerks, who were all women, told a local judge his profane phrase, which referred to them as "bitches," upset and alarmed them, according to court records. The judge referred Barboza's speeding payment form to a prosecutor and ordered Barboza to appear in court.
When Barboza showed up, the local judge reprimanded him for his comments on the form and told him he would be arrested, Seibel said in her ruling. Barboza was handcuffed and taken away before his release on $200 bail.
Seibel said the arrest violated Barboza's First Amendment rights, and she noted the criminal charge eventually was dismissed on those grounds. She said Barboza's phrase was crude and offensive to some but "did not convey an imminent threat and was made in the context of complaining about government activity."
"That the court clerks who received plaintiff's message were apparently alarmed by it does not alter the analysis," the judge added.
In an NYCLU release, Barboza was quoted as saying he was treated as a criminal for a "few harmless words."
"Instead of protecting freedom of speech, government officers in Liberty handcuffed me, arrested me for a crime and almost sent me to jail because I harmlessly expressed my frustration with a speeding ticket," he said.
Lawyers for the village didn't immediately return calls seeking comment Tuesday.
Seibel said that between 2003 and 2012 as many as 63 arrests by police officers in the village had occurred "because of the use of vulgar words in what may be perceived as a threatening context." She said one arrest occurred when a defendant called someone a slut, another resulted from someone talking about sexual acts on a police department phone line and another came after a defendant threatened to kill someone's dog.
"The village has no requirement to insure its officers are trained on the First Amendment," Seibel said before announcing she was requiring the Sullivan County village to face trial on claims it failed to properly train police officers about free speech.
She said the trial would include a damages phase for a prosecutor who is not protected by immunity because his actions were unreasonable.
Barboza's lawsuit had sought unspecified damages.
I fucking hate this fucking "F-bomb" terminology, fucking fuckers :mad:
3...2...1... before Beeb comes in to defend the prosecutor's actions.
Can you not cite someone for contempt of court for writing insulting language on a court document?
Quote from: Ideologue on September 17, 2015, 05:54:14 AM
Can you not cite someone for contempt of court for writing insulting language on a court document?
I would assume you would have to interpret this narrowly (as it is limitation of freedom of speech) so the document would have to actually come from the court or be sent to the court with insulting language to be considered contempt. I would similarly not expect to be cited for contempt of court if, as a defendant, I wrote something insulting on a plaintiff's statement and sent it back to the plaintiff.
Edit: unless a clerk can be seen as a court official, I guess but (I may be wrong on it) the clerk represents the town and in traffic ticket cases the town is a party to the proceedings, not part of the court.
Nah. The clerk's an administrative employee of the judiciary, who just takes payment of fines and does other work at the courthouse. It's likeliest that the traffic officer himself or herself would've represented the State in the original proceeding.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on September 17, 2015, 01:38:23 AM
I fucking hate this fucking "F-bomb" terminology, fucking fuckers :mad:
It's for the children Tricky. :sleep:
H-bomb is better.
I have no problem with some dipshit having to cool his heels in jail for a few days because ignores the standards of basic human courtesy. It's not that different from say indecent exposure.
Quote from: Martinus on September 17, 2015, 02:05:41 AM
3...2...1... before Beeb comes in to defend the prosecutor's actions.
Read the story again: it was the judge who arrested the fellow and held him in contempt. The story doesn't say the prosecutor did anything.
Quote from: Barrister on September 17, 2015, 12:04:21 PM
Quote from: Martinus on September 17, 2015, 02:05:41 AM
3...2...1... before Beeb comes in to defend the prosecutor's actions.
Read the story again: it was the judge who arrested the fellow and held him in contempt. The story doesn't say the prosecutor did anything.
No, he didn't.
Quotearrested on an aggravated-harassment
I mentioned contempt. He was arrested for and charged with an actual crime, not contempt. Why didn't the judge cite him for contempt? I dunno, my memory of contempt rules is hazy. It may only apply to contempt in the presence of the court, and foul language in documents may not rise to that level.
This reminds me of an episode of Tales from the Crypt or Amazing Stories or Outer Limits or one of those shows. It starred the redhead who played Kevin's mom in Home Alone. Some town was like executing people for minor infractions or something like that.
edit: Yeah, here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbL0gym7i2o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbL0gym7i2o)
Quote from: Caliga on September 17, 2015, 07:02:16 PM
Some town was like executing people for minor infractions or something like that.
Town full of Razzes, sounds like.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on September 17, 2015, 01:38:23 AM
I fucking hate this fucking "F-bomb" terminology, fucking fuckers :mad:
(https://38.media.tumblr.com/e6926711b8175021744c123ca3674066/tumblr_mpuqk8LqHK1rphs2wo3_500.gif)
Quote from: Ideologue on September 17, 2015, 07:09:25 AM
Nah. The clerk's an administrative employee of the judiciary, who just takes payment of fines and does other work at the courthouse. It's likeliest that the traffic officer himself or herself would've represented the State in the original proceeding.
Really? This little town had its own judiciary? Because the story mentions that the complainants were town clerks. County clerks are often elected (they are here) and also not employees of the judiciary. I am sure that the court has clerks, but they'd not be involved in law enforcement, just administration of justice.
I could be wrong, though; we could ask a lawyer.
Hey, Valmy, remember what I said about Languish being a cesspool of negativity?
Quote from: grumbler on September 18, 2015, 07:31:11 AM
I could be wrong, though; we could ask a lawyer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CY6kLZfR8ag (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CY6kLZfR8ag)
It's an important issue of our time. You can certainly see why it would make him angry enough to intercede in a conversation that didn't include him to throw a cheap shot my way.
It's grumbler.