If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Website operator charged with obstruction and libel for speaking out against local police. Fark this, I'm moving to Canada   (calgaryherald.com) divider line 126
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

15701 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Sep 2010 at 7:34 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



126 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-09-18 06:50:01 PM
Did you RTFA, submitter? This happened in Canada.
 
2010-09-18 07:03:07 PM
AntiNorm: Did you RTFA, submitter? This happened in Canada.

i4.photobucket.com
 
2010-09-18 07:35:54 PM
So what do you think of the Versailles Police Department, Drew?
 
2010-09-18 07:39:44 PM
Er, so? If it's libellious, a judge will decide. Authority figures are capable of occasionally using the law correctly, despite popular opinion, but something like this hits the internet and everyone is all OH NOES MAH LIBERTIES BE STOLEN BY JACKBOOTED THUGS.
 
2010-09-18 07:40:06 PM
Clintoned in the boobies.

/Imaginary +1
 
2010-09-18 07:45:30 PM
Alberta is Canada's Texas.

If this happened in BC, Ontario, Quebec and maybe Manitoba then I would be shocked.
 
2010-09-18 07:47:28 PM
For those of us who don't get it, I don't get it. Can someone explain to those of us ho don't get it? Can someone explain to those of us who don't get it?
 
2010-09-18 07:49:53 PM
I like the cut of his jib. I wonder if he has a news letter that I could subscribe to?
 
2010-09-18 07:52:01 PM
Good. This ungrateful hack should praise the police for their continued protection of him and his freedoms. If he doesn't then he should be imprisoned.
 
2010-09-18 07:53:31 PM
If you libel someone in your blog, or online, they can sue you for it.
If you obstruct justice, they can charge you as well.

Anyone blogging, who flirts with these kind of subjects really should have a good insurance policy for it. (new window)
My media company does.
 
2010-09-18 07:53:42 PM
I see what you did there
 
2010-09-18 07:54:19 PM
As police departments all over the US look on enviously.
 
2010-09-18 07:56:10 PM
Fark this, I'm moving to Canada

Approves:

img829.imageshack.us
 
2010-09-18 07:56:23 PM
He didn't just say the "police" did these things. It sounds like he went after individuals by name. He should expect to have to back it up in court.
 
2010-09-18 07:56:27 PM
Canadian Bacon
 
2010-09-18 07:57:01 PM
It's because the website's content is all in English.

He needs to rewrite everything up there in French, also.

/obscure?
 
2010-09-18 07:57:25 PM

"What makes Kelly's site libellous, said McGinnis, are the false allegations made against two city homicide investigators."


Maybe I'm confused, but either in Canada (or in the U.S.) wouldn't this be a civil matter instead of a criminal matter?


"Police deny the charges, saying they injure the reputation of Calgary police officers and interfere with an ongoing homicide investigation."


Interfere with ongoing investigations, maybe I'd understand, but not injuring their reputation. Let their work speak for their reputation.

 
2010-09-18 07:57:43 PM
Wow, I guess it wasn't obscure as the person who posted before me name the movie that was from.
 
2010-09-18 07:57:46 PM
Guess what? Fark this guy. Freedom of speech doesn't allow you to pin crimes on people that haven't been convicted of anything.
If bloggers want to pretend they're journalists, then they should expect to play by the same rules journalists do.
 
2010-09-18 08:01:15 PM
sens: Guess what? Fark this guy. Freedom of speech doesn't allow you to pin crimes on people that haven't been convicted of anything.
If bloggers want to pretend they're journalists, then they should expect to play by the same rules journalists do.


My god, it's full of whargarble! Link (new window)
 
2010-09-18 08:04:04 PM
sens: Freedom of speech doesn't allow you to pin crimes on people that haven't been convicted of anything.

In Canada it does. Their freedom of speech has a higher power level than ours.
 
2010-09-18 08:10:51 PM
They have the internet in Canada?
 
2010-09-18 08:13:16 PM
Sexy Republican Girl: sens: Freedom of speech doesn't allow you to pin crimes on people that haven't been convicted of anything.

In Canada it does. Their freedom of speech has a higher power level than ours.


+ Resistance to frost damage
 
2010-09-18 08:13:52 PM
Sexy Republican Girl: sens: Freedom of speech doesn't allow you to pin crimes on people that haven't been convicted of anything.

In Canada it does. Their freedom of speech has a higher power level than ours.


Not really, just here we have to "fight" for our rights, where in Canadia no one really bothers you about it.
 
2010-09-18 08:15:06 PM
The Southern Dandy: They have the internet in Canada?

They use ours, actually.
 
2010-09-18 08:20:21 PM
The Southern Dandy: They have the internet in Canada?

Apparently they just got it last week, and received only the first 3 colours:

more whargarble (new window)

/that's right, "colours"
 
2010-09-18 08:20:23 PM
Sexy Republican Girl: In Canada it does. Their freedom of speech has a higher power level than ours.

I assume you're being ironic. There is no such thing in Canada as freedom of speech per se; the Charter of Rights makes it clear that your freedom to enjoy what you might have supposed to be your inalienable rights is dependent on whether or not the government deems you to be enjoying those rights in a "responsible" manner. If you express yourself in a way that the prevailing authorities happen to dislike, you may find yourself prosecuted either criminally (as in this case) or bureaucratically, through the agency of the Orwellian- inspired "Human Rights Commissions".

The American 1st Amendment, as challenged and circumscribed as it may be in practice, is the world's greatest expression of free- speech idealism. You lot down there should be proud of that and always make sure you fight to defend it.
 
2010-09-18 08:21:27 PM
AcneVulgaris: The Southern Dandy: They have the internet in Canada?

They use ours, actually.


Everybody near the border should put passwords on their wireless routers, immediately.
 
2010-09-18 08:23:43 PM
AntiNorm: Did you RTFA, submitter? This happened in Canada.

....vvvvvVVVVVVVRRRRRROOOOOOooooommmmm....
 
2010-09-18 08:27:45 PM
leftymcrighty: Apparently they just got it last week, and received only the first 3 colours:

more whargarble (new windows)


You lie. I see text there in black, blue, red, green, navy blue and off-red*, which means we are advanced enough for seven colours, if you include the background white. In your face, America!

/*this is not a Can-Con reference to the "Handmaid's Tale"
 
2010-09-18 08:28:26 PM
Sharia Law, coming to a Canadian province near you?

Civitas Press Release: Honesty and truth sidelined in government ...
Jun 29, 2009 ... According to Denis MacEoin, author of Sharia Law or 'One Law For All'?, ... In 2004 the Canadian province of Ontario was planning to impose legally ... civilisation: take it away and you disrupt the whole edifice. ...
www.civitas.org.uk/press/prcs91.php - Cached - Similar
 
2010-09-18 08:28:38 PM
skinink: Maybe I'm confused, but either in Canada (or in the U.S.) wouldn't this be a civil matter instead of a criminal matter?

I was wondering this myself. I know it would be a civil matter in the U.S.
 
2010-09-18 08:29:06 PM

Anyone blogging, who flirts with these kind of subjects, really should have a good insurance policy for it.


I wholeheartedly concur.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2010-09-18 08:29:26 PM
In 10 years Mexico will seem like a liberal's wet dream the way things are going.
 
2010-09-18 08:30:27 PM
Canada still has mounties?
 
2010-09-18 08:32:38 PM
AntiNorm: Did you RTFA, submitter? This happened in Canada.

How can it be 2010 and there are still so many people oblivious to trolling?
 
2010-09-18 08:36:25 PM
Yep, no such thing as big brother. Nothing to see here...move along. It's all just one big conspiracy theory in the minds of retards. Move along. You have reality TV shows and techno gadgets to think about. Nothing to question here, no sir.

This guy and his stupid website was not harming anyone or putting anyone in danger.

Nobody is going to take such a shiatty website seriously.

Look at that thing. I could masterbate into a blender, throw some cotton candy and a frog in it, turn the thing on high, and what came out would still look better than that "website".

Can you get AIDS from looking at a website? I think I just got web contracted AIDS.
 
2010-09-18 08:36:51 PM
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2010-09-18 08:39:53 PM
Bad news for everyone here at fark that the police are now willing to investigate every untrue statement on the internet.
 
2010-09-18 08:41:02 PM
"Canada has had one of the strictest libel regimes among common law countries - more strict than England, where "libel tourism" has begun to mushroom and where newspapers (notably the Guardian) and civil liberties organisations have campaigned for libel laws to be reformed to be closer to the protections affored in the United States. The decisions finally bring Canada more in line with the UK, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa."

Link (new window)
 
2010-09-18 08:44:36 PM
Tofino: Er, so? If it's libellious, a judge will decide. Authority figures are capable of occasionally using the law correctly, despite popular opinion, but something like this hits the internet and everyone is all OH NOES MAH LIBERTIES BE STOLEN BY JACKBOOTED THUGS.

The fact that it's even going to a judge is a massive problem. The fact the judge will likely side with the police is another problem as well. When people are being sued for free speech, liberties are being trampled, period. In terrorism, the threat of violence is often as or more effective than the actual violence, so too with the erosion of liberty.
 
2010-09-18 08:53:18 PM
Here in Ontario we have a special unit of the "thought police" who call and visit activists if they suspect a protest might happen for any reason.

Link

Link

Just look at the videos on Youtube from the recent G20 weekend. Canada is officially a police state. Problem is most Canadians will not admit it to themselves....until it affects them.
 
2010-09-18 08:59:33 PM
Goimir: Wow, I guess it wasn't obscure as the person who posted before me name the movie that was from.

great moments in fark
 
2010-09-18 09:00:22 PM
andersonboyz: Here in Ontario we have a special unit of the "thought police" who call and visit activists if they suspect a protest might happen for any reason.

Far be it from me to rain on anyone's "1984!!!!" parade, but calling and asking if you're going to do something and leaving a business card hardly seem like threatening activities.
 
2010-09-18 09:03:57 PM
ChubbyTiger: Clintoned in the boobies.

/Imaginary +1


I don't know what that means, but I'm going to say it at least 3 times a day now.
 
2010-09-18 09:12:06 PM
skinink: "What makes Kelly's site libellous, said McGinnis, are the false allegations made against two city homicide investigators."

Maybe I'm confused, but either in Canada (or in the U.S.) wouldn't this be a civil matter instead of a criminal matter?



I wondered this as well. Also, the provider is New York based. Does this change anything? If he posted from the US, would US law be followed? If a US citizen railed on the Canadian police online, could they be arrested for breaking Canadian law?
 
2010-09-18 09:20:05 PM
Barakku: Tofino: Er, so? If it's libellious, a judge will decide. Authority figures are capable of occasionally using the law correctly, despite popular opinion, but something like this hits the internet and everyone is all OH NOES MAH LIBERTIES BE STOLEN BY JACKBOOTED THUGS.

The fact that it's even going to a judge is a massive problem. The fact the judge will likely side with the police is another problem as well. When people are being sued for free speech, liberties are being trampled, period. In terrorism, the threat of violence is often as or more effective than the actual violence, so too with the erosion of liberty.



Spoken like a true child molester.
 
2010-09-18 09:26:03 PM
Being a retired officer, I can tell you I am not surprised at this. People seem to think they can yell movie in a crowded firehouse or some such nonsense without getting their knuckles rapped for it. We didn't tolerate it in my day and I'm sure LEO's of today don't either.
 
2010-09-18 09:27:59 PM
jbrooks544: If you libel someone in your blog, or online, they can sue you for it.
If you obstruct justice, they can charge you as well.

Anyone blogging, who flirts with these kind of subjects really should have a good insurance policy for it. (new window)
My media company does.


Yeah, thing is, they're charging him criminally for libel and defamation.
 
2010-09-18 09:28:29 PM
pissing off the po-po in public, be he right or wrong, falls under bringing unwanted attention to oneself. good luck fella, you're gonna need it.
 
Displayed 50 of 126 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report