Archive for the ‘Pennsylvania’ Category

More on Profanity crime in freedom loving PA

Tuesday, May 18th, 2010

As I blogged about a few days ago, police in Pennsylvania have a habit of arresting people for using language in public that the state disapproves of.

The ACLU of PA filed a lawsuit against the state for what is apparently a very common activity on the part of cops who have issued 750 citations for profanity over a one year period.

From nationalpost.com:

“Police should be focused on protecting public safety, not enforcing manners,” said Marieke Tuthill, a legal fellow with the ACLU of Pennsylvania. “It may not be polite to swear at someone, but it’s certainly not a crime.”

Hereis what I find most disturbing:

The ACLU said that it has successfully defended about a dozen profanity-users, including one woman who was issued a citation after she was caught swearing — at her clogged toilet.

Government continues to violate people’s free speech rights ‘because they can‘.  From the state’s perspective, there really is no down side.  So, the case gets thrown out.  So what?

What the court needs to do is impose a penalty against the actual people involved in this harassment.   If a cop had to put up with the same inconvenience and hassle that he is imposing on those he’s citing for a non-crime, it would stop in a hurry.  Unfortunately, cops are mostly immune from any penalty for harassment of citizens.

Posted in Bad Words, Censorship, Law Enforcement Abuses, Obscenity, Pennsylvania, Police Misconduct | 2 Comments »

Should foul language constitute disorderly conduct?

Friday, May 14th, 2010

It is in Mocanaqua, PA.  According to timesleader.com report, Lona Scarpa, 35, who was nearly struck by a motorcycle rider was breaking the law when she cussed out the reckless driver.

The ACLU, on behalf of Lona Scarpa, 35, filed a lawsuit in federal court on Wednesday against the state police, which charged her with disorderly conduct in October 2008. She was acquitted of the summary offense in January 2009.

According to the lawsuit, Scarpa and her friend were walking on Railroad Street, Mocanaqua, when a man on a motorcycle swerved close to her and shouted an insult on Oct. 9, 2008. Scarpa yelled back, calling the biker an “a******” three times, the lawsuit says.

Naturally, although the whole focus of the story centers on what the woman said, the news report censors the actual word.  Americans are so used to being shielded from even the most mild distress that they don’t even blink at this kind of absurdity.

The suit says Edwards told Scarpa that if he cited the motorcyclist, he would have to issue her a citation because the motorcyclist claimed she yelled the obscenity three times.

Scarpa received the citation in the mail, hired an attorney and was found not guilty of disorderly conduct.

This, of course, goes back to the philosophy that the First Amendment has exceptions and those exceptions now encompass the mere expression of anger.  That this doesn’t trigger outrage on the part of the public is stunning, but the fact that law enforcement, which is sworn to uphold the Constitution actually sees no conflict in what they are doing here.

Is this a freak case?  Apparently not.

The ACLU submitted a Right-to-Know request for disorderly conduct citations issued by state police from September 2008 to September 2009.

Troopers issued more than 770 disorderly conduct citations in that span that did not meet the legal definition of obscenity, the ACLU says.

I’m pretty certain it is quite common for law enforcement to treat foul language as disorderly conduct.  People who think government respects free speech except in extreme circumstances are not paying attention.

Posted in Bad Words, Censorship, Law Enforcement Abuses, Obscenity, Pennsylvania | Comments Off

3rd Circuit rules on ‘sexting’ case

Friday, March 19th, 2010

Back in January, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments concerning a prosecutor’s threat to charge three Pennsylvania teenagers under child porn laws unless they enrolled in an “Education Program” that would teach them, among other things, “what it means to be a girl”.

From theregister.com:

In a unanimous decision issued Wednesday by the appeals court in Philadelphia, a three-judge panel said the threat amounted to a “Hobson’s Choice” that would retaliate against one of the girls and her family for exercising their constitutional right to free speech. A rare dose of government-issued sanity in the prosecutorial crusade against teenage “sexting”, the ruling upheld a lower-court order issued last year in the case.

While this is certainly a positive outcome in this case, it remains to be seen how the courts will ultimately weigh in on the application of child porn laws to children.  While prosecuting children under the very laws that were meant to protect them might seem counter-intuitive, when it comes to sex crimes, the American justice system is governed far more by sex hysteria than by rationality.

Posted in Child Pornography, Pennsylvania, Sexting | Comments Off

School suspends laptop webcam spying on kids

Saturday, February 20th, 2010

From ars technica:

Less than a day after Harriton High School’s questionable laptop policy made headlines online, its school district has disabled its remote monitoring capabilities.

According to an AP story on Yahoo, the FBI is now involved…

A law-enforcement official with knowledge of the case says the FBI has opened a criminal investigation into a Pennsylvania school district accused of activating webcams inside students’ homes without their knowledge.

Posted in Big Brother is Watching You, Pennsylvania | Comments Off

Mary Beth Buchanan running for Congress

Friday, February 19th, 2010

Former U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan is running for the U.S. Congress in Pennsylvania.  Buchanan is most famous for her costly 2003 crusade against drug paraphernalia and subsequent self-serving high profile prosecution of comedian Tommy Chong for selling bongs.

More interesting from a Sex Hysteria point of view is her more recent prosecution of Karen Fletcher of Donora, PA who wrote horrific sexually explicit fiction involving children which she published on her membership-only website.   There were no images.  In the 35 years since the Supreme Court first defined obscenity there had not been a single successful prosecution of an obscenity case involving text only.  At the time of her indictment, Fletcher’s site had only 29 members.

As in almost all federal cases, Chong and Fletcher ultimately agreed to a plea deal.

If there was ever a person willing to walk to Washington DC by stepping on the bodies of those crucified for victimless crimes, Mary Beth Buchanan is that person.

Let’s hope she looses in the May 18th primary.

Posted in Child Pornography, Obscenity, Pennsylvania, United States | Comments Off

Is the webcam in your laptop a portal for Big Brother?

Thursday, February 18th, 2010

It can be if you live in Lower Merion School District, outside of Philadelphia.

The issue came to light when the Robbins’s child was disciplined for “improper behavior in his home” and the Vice Principal used a photo taken by the webcam as evidence.

I assume the threshold for becoming a vice principle there must be pretty low if someone that ignorant of the concept of privacy can get the job.

I hope the lawsuit succeeds in making a deep impression on the idiots who thought that one up.  Unfortunately,  the actual government employees who have abused their powers and betrayed the trust of the public aren’t the ones who pay for such abuse of their position.  No, it’s the taxpayers who will get stuck with that bill.

First it was cell phones and now laptops.  And let’s not forget about the little black box in your car that can rat on you for speeding right before an accident.

This story was pulled from a comment over at the agitator.com.

Posted in Big Brother is Watching You, Pennsylvania, Privacy, United States | Comments Off

More prosecution of kids for non-crimes to save them from non-injuries.

Monday, February 8th, 2010

Pennsylvania wants to criminalize sexting by teens 13 to 17 and since 30% of teens admit to sexting, this could definitely be considered a jobs bill for prosecutors.

What kind of people sit around thinking up a way if making it a crime to be naked even if the public would never even know about it?

Pennlive.com says:

…under HB 2189, all of these teens could become ineligible for college loans, scholarships, military service and employment….

Posted in Pennsylvania, Sexting | Comments Off

3rd Circuit Hears Sexting Case

Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

As I posted a few days ago, the 3rd Circuit heard arguments regarding three Pennsylvania girls who were threatened with child porn charges if they didn’t attend some kind of re-education program.

Law.com nicely summarizes what happened and it’s a good read.  Personally, I think this is another case of an over-zealous prosecutor flexing powers he doesn’t legally have.  Exploitation and invasion of privacy are real issues, but the state has no business charging anyone with a crime for simply being nude.  Child porn laws were originally conceived to protect children, not prosecute them.

Credit for the link goes to Sex Offender Research.

Posted in Child Pornography, Nudity, Pennsylvania, Rights of the Accused, Sexting, United States | Comments Off

Children as child pornographers…

Thursday, January 14th, 2010

Tomorrow, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals will take up the case of Miller v. Skumanick in which three Pennsylvania  girls were threatened with child pornography  prosecution by then-District Attorney George Skumanick Jr. unless they attended a “re-education program” that would teach them “what it means to be a girl”.

From what I’ve read here, here, and here, those who support the three girls, including the ACLU, contend that the pictures do not fit the description of child porn, eliminating any probable cause to bring child porn charges in the first place. More importantly, in my opinion, they point out that it makes no sense to prosecute children under the very child porn laws that are intended to protect them.

Child porn laws have strayed so far from their intended purpose of protecting children that even those who have no connection with child pornography can be prosecuted under them.  With this new twist of actually targeting children with these laws, prosecutors are themselves victimizing children and parents are now having to fight off the power of the state to save their children from one of the most destructive stigmas that can be attached to anyone modern America.

The mantra of protecting children has become the primary justification by which government has injected itself into almost every aspect of our personal lives.  Indeed, they have taken on the role of being a senior  family member.  We’ve grown so accustomed to accepting, without question, their incremental incursions, that we’re all startled when we suddenly see just how utterly nonsensical their behavior has become.  And, while it easily gets our attention when it gets this ridiculous, government is oblivious to the fact that they’ve wandered far outside of the territory where they are, at least arguably, part of the solution well into the land of being irrefutably part of the  problem.  So, we have a government that aggressively defends the very idiocy that borders on insanity to most thinking people.

It would be wonderful if the courts actually got back to their original contention that the function of child porn laws is to protect children not victimize them.  But, I’m not holding my breath.  At the minimum I’m hoping that the circuit court at least upholds the district court injunction against the child porn charges against the thee girls.

Posted in Child Pornography, Pennsylvania, Rights of the Accused, Sexting, United States | Comments Off