Austin Cops Ready To Investigate, Arrest Bloggers And Blog Commenters Who Criticize Them

Proof • September 26, 2009

A reminder that, even if you’re posting anonymously, if you post something on the internet you can probably be held accountable for it legally.

Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo says he and some of his officers have been harassed, lied about and had their identities falsely used in online blogs and in reader comment sections on local media Internet sites.
They’ve had enough.
In a meeting this month with department brass, Acevedo and the group discussed how they think such posts erode public trust in the department and how they have been wrongly maligned.
They have since researched their legal options and decided that from now on, they might launch formal investigations into such posts, Acevedo said. He said investigators might seek search warrants or subpoenas from judges to learn the identities of the authors — he thinks some could be department employees — and possibly sue them for libel or file charges if investigators think a crime was committed.
“A lot of my people feel it is time to take these people on,” Acevedo said. “They understand the damage to the organization, and quite frankly, when people are willfully misleading and lying, they are pretty much cowards anyway because they are doing so under the cloak of anonymity.”

On one hand, the idea of cops essentially outing anonymous bloggers and commenters who are critical of them is a bit chilling. On the other hand, just because you can post anonymously on the internet doesn’t give you license to slander and defame. I long ago made the decision to write on this blog under my own name, and I’ve at times regretted that decision as I’ve threatened and even banished because of the things I’ve said. But ultimately I believe that if I’m going to be critical of someone else I’m going to put my name to it and live with the consequences of my words.
What Acevedo and his department is doing may seem a little heavy-handed, but the problems they’re facing aren’t trivial. As the article notes:

The effort to crack down on potentially illegal statements or comments that are possibly libelous — those published with the goal of defaming a person — is the second time in recent months that the department has confronted new social media.
In March, the social networking site Twitter shut down a fake account that pretended to issue official Austin police bulletins after the department and the Texas attorney general’s office complained.

And there are protections in place for those who are merely hosting the comments or posts in question:

University of Texas law professor David Anderson said the hosts of sites where potentially libelous comments are posted are granted immunity by federal laws. Those who post comments can still be sued, however.

As long as proper warrants are obtained I don’t have a problem with this, I guess. Is there a potential for intimidation and abuse by the police and other agents of the government? Sure. But in libel and slander cases the truth is a defense. If what the commenters or bloggers are saying is true they don’t have anything to worry about.

Tags: Politics

http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

I wonder what Hamilton, Jay and Madison thought about publishing anonymously? If only there was a place where we could read about their views on government.

While you may agree that a some of the guys posting are in the wrong, free speech means something.
carrick

This has nothing to do with criticizing, the act of impersonating e.g an officer is in itself in many cases an illegal act. And even in cases where it isn’t a criminal act, you can still face civil repercussions. Misrepresenting the position of any business, agency or institution while pretending to act in an official position for that agency certainly is libelous, and it would be expected that in any other venue you would automatically be subject to applicable laws.

Anonymity isn’t a get out of jail free card: It’s something I’ve warned Dino about another times, like when he called for the killing of a police officer or made a sexually explicit comment about a prepubescent child.

And as the blogosphere continues to be more influential, a bit of self-policing is something we are all going to have to do more of.
2Hotel9

According to the article they are only going after people “who misrepresent themselves as officials in online comments”, which they damned well should. That is a whole lot different from criticizing them. It would be tantamount to impersonating a police officer.

Now, if they start using this as a means of harassing people or silencing critics of their actions or policies, that is a whole different kettle of fish.

And this “State lawmakers this year passed a law that took effect Sept. 1 making it a third-degree felony to use another person’s name to post messages on a social networking site without their permission and with the intent to harm, defraud, intimidate or threaten.” is the law they will use. Seems benign enough, as long as it is not used simply to silence critics it is not a problem.
Pilgrim

I agree. The luxury of posting under a psuedonym does NOT give anyone the right to slander or defame. Posting a reasonable criticism or even a wrong opinion in good faith is one thing – deliberately vicious and false hyperbole is another.

I still post under “Pilgrim” because I’ve gotten used to it and kind of attached to it. It’s no secret what my name is here.
2Hotel9

Pil, you can certainly relate, having been “inside” until recently. People posing as police officers or city admin officials is far different from saying nasty things about people.
deejeanm

See, here’s the thing with something sounding reasonable, after all, these officers and the dept are under vile written attack from what I’m gathering here, so, why not be allowed to have their accusors’ names?

One major reason:

Precedent – we get to this and it can lead to further disregard for the First Amendment and in the end, really, it would seem to me, the law in that town have the SAME opportunity. They can set up a blog, which, show the facts of any claim and REFUTE. (If they are able to). Also, this would save taxpayers, in a time of low economy, money.

I don’t see a judge handing down warrants to gain names, unless, the posts can be proven untrue. But then, in this world, we’ve seen all too many judges ruling politically.

I’m thinking this is a case of not just libelous comment against the police in this instance, but freedoms at stake. All too often, these days, emotion, before long-term consequences, is chosen. We have a right to speak and before we’re proven libelous, to be able to continue to do so.

Should a poster, actually, threaten harm, on a member(s) of the Austin police departments, then, they should pursue it. Regarding, stolen identity, that’s an avenue where law, likely, stands on their side, already and a judge may rule in favor of the police investigators.

In my mind, the officers are maybe…a tad worried about the taunts being true, for some, or, the most part.

However, if they get these names and go after these folks who post commentary, without, stealing officers’ identities, then, perhaps, the posters might have a point about the workings of the Austin police department. It may be a bit heavy handed – I cant see the posts to learn if this is a charge against them by their detractors.

Each city needs a good working relationship between law and citizens and I’m not sure overbearing retaliatory actions by police is going to aid in that effort.

Our local and Fed governments don’t need any more power over citizens than the law (some of it bad) allows, already, imo.
2Hotel9

Without the impersonating charge the libel charge will get dropped. The police chief, Acevedo, stated,”he and some of his officers have been harassed, lied about and had their identities falsely used”. It is the use of their identities in a false manner that they will use as the legal springboard to go after these people. And in the end it is department/city employees who are apparently involved in this that they will pursue. Your average citizen does not have the access to information which could make libelous comments/statements actionable. These insiders are the ones doing real harm, if any.

Austin police have a bad rep to begin with, being a college town AND politics soaked city to begin with.
Pilgrim

Hotel,

You could be right to a point. If you’re a public figure – as all police officers are – then you can holler “harrassment” all you want when people openly criticize. It won’t fly. Just ask any officer who made the local paper in a negative way.

BUT – if someone is using the identities of the officers to defame them, well, that’s a whole other kettle of fish. That’s probably actionable, both criminally and civily.
Neiman

There are some very legitimate arguments made above about libel and impersonating other people that should have serious consequences for those involved; but as someone else suggested, I am very uneasy about the chiling impact upon free speech by people under the color of authority to protect their names and reputations, which free speech is already under serious assault in this country. If we must decide between those in the minority engaging in libel and impersonations versus the innumerable people simply posting/commenting anonymously to avoid being personally harassed by the mental defectives online, then I must come down on the side of free speech.

The real problem as someone suggested is opening the door to police-state intimidation, we might justify it in this one special case and within no time it becomes a floodgate to silence free speech and for the state to both persecute and prosecute political enemies. But, that is not strange, Americans have a nasty habit of allowing small things to infringe upon their rights and the next small thing and the next until one day all of those small things have taken away their rights completely. It seems America is destined to never learn from history, but repeat the same stupid mistakes over and over again, because as a people we are just not very smart!

I am amazed that so many of you do not have at least some concerns about the dangers herein.
http://insanereindeer.blogspot.com/ Kenny

And there’s always the fact that, even if found innocent, an arrest and charge stay on your record forever. If falsely charged, the accused could spend tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend themselves in court. And to recoup in any action against the city, they’d have to prove that the officer’s intent was not just damaging, but purposefully malicious. And that’s virtually impossible to prove.

And let’s not miss that the officers are conflating pretending to be a police officer with defamatory statements. Nobody likes being criticized, but most police (even good ones) tend to think themselves above criticism. And if they use their power to stiffle that criticism, that’s a dangerous precident.
Neiman

Anonymity isn’t a get out of jail free card: It’s something I’ve warned Dino about another times, like when he called for the killing of a police officer or made a sexually explicit comment about a prepubescent child.

It is precisely because people the writer above have absolutely no respect for liberty and/or fear of the State that we are in such danger in America. While as I said there are some good arguments for the police action described, it is also a cheap and easy excuse for invasion of privacy, stifling of free speech and oppression by the state, as each successive anti-free internet speech step will build on this one more or less agreeable action.

The internet and blogs are the last place in America where there is any free speech left at all, granted a lot of abusive, extreme and idiotic free speech, but almost everywhere else Free political Speech in the public square requires the permission of the government and that speech must adhere to liberal parameters. If that speech is conservative or Christian and speaks against others it is hate speech and a crime. So, while it can be abused by many, if we do not fight to keep the government’s hands off the internet, there will be no free speech left at all. In Europe they are moving to even tax internet activity via phone or cable connections, giving the state a financial interest in further controls.

This caused me to think about WW-II and an underground newspaper that the Germans tried to shut down, killing publisher after publisher and even killing innocent civilians; men, women and children, to force them to tell the Nazi’s where the paper was being published. Yet, no matter how violent and repressive the Nazi’s were, the paper daily printed stories against the Nazi’s until after the war. The average citizens died rather than violate the anonymity of those brave people fighting against an oppressive regime. Yet, here in the land of liberty some, even here at SAB, have no respect at all for the hunger of many to be able to rage against the power of the State without fear that the few crazy people will track them down and do harm to them or their families to silence them. Liberty demands the ability to bring suffering to the comfortable and to comfort the suffering and for good or ill that requires anonymity and today a free internet.
Neiman

Kenny: Very good response!
2Hotel9

Things like this certainly have a muzzling effect on many people, and pushes other’s volume control way up.
sayanything-6955

You run a damn good blog here, and have some brilliant people who post here. Although some, 3,4,5 are whack jobs so be it. No one ever needs to run from the truth! But I still have great concerns about this “big brother”
sayanything-6955

I agree. The luxury of posting under a psuedonym does NOT give anyone the right to slander or defame. Posting a reasonable criticism or even a wrong opinion in good faith is one thing – deliberately vicious and false hyperbole is another.

I guess I am one those that uses my real name, I post and comment on as much factual info as I have and so be it, If I am wrong it will be pointed out. As it should be. But there are are a few here who push the limit.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

No 2h9 it isn’t just people who are impersonating officers but people who the police feel are guilty of libel.

SayAnythingBlog.com

Austin Cops Ready To Investigate, Arrest Bloggers And Blog Commenters Who Criticize Them

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments