Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It seems like almost everyone understands that it's about the extortion/blackmailing. Why can't you?
Maybe you dont understand that its not extortion..
The use, or the express or implicit threat of the use, of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to person, reputation, or property as a means to obtain property from someone else with his consent. USC 18
There is nothing violent, nor criminal about it. Clearly my understanding of the law is much better than yours, but thats not my fault, is it?
My problem with any of this is people being able to have access to info is one thing, but publishing "arrests" I disagree with.
Arresting is very different than an actual prosecution. You can be arrested for anything, often times not convicted. Nm the ridiculous and unscrupulous ways some officers will behave.
I also believe the way the info is presented and accessed matters.
I dont like it, but I also dont like other such policies in america, like accusations of domestic abuse laws, which require someone to be arrested, even without any abuse taking place, the guilty of DUI, without evidence because you refuse to concent to have a breathalizer, and lots of other laws.
But not liking something, doesnt mean its extortion, nor illegal.
Maybe you dont understand that its not extortion..
The use, or the express or implicit threat of the use, of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to person, reputation, or property as a means to obtain property from someone else with his consent. USC 18
There is nothing violent, nor criminal about it. Clearly my understanding of the law is much better than yours, but thats not my fault, is it?
Maybe you don't understand that I also included blackmail. Clearly my comprehension skills are much better than yours, but that's not my fault, blame it on competition.
Maybe you don't understand that I also included blackmail. Clearly my comprehension skills are much better than yours, but that's not my fault, blame it on competition.
And you're still wrong.
blackmail would be him charging money not to publish something thats not already public.. This is removal of information that is public.. Thats the opposite of one another.
Blackmail is gaining or attempting to gain anything of value or compelling another to act against such person's will, by threatening to communicate accusations or statements about any person that would subject such person or any other person to public ridicule, contempt or degradation
In this instance, they ALREADY COMMUNICATED the accusation, or statement.
You can call it whatever you want, but that doesnt make you correct..
This may even be harrassment. If you dont pay up, he advertises to your neighbors. If you still dont pay up, he hits up your place of employment. Yes this info is public record, but to then take that info, and target advertise the information to neighbors and employers crosses the line. Before the site went down, he had people on there for speeding. Good grief talk about casting a wide net. Oh and conveniently his as well as his brother's DUI's are missing, as is his father's sex offense. This guy is a piece of work.
In retaliation, Creed’s own home address was published within a thread on the popular KSLR forums after his home address was found within a lawsuit filed last year that was also public record. Creed requested that the entire forum thread be deleted
The poor baby. Hope he can defend himself physically as well as legally! And he'll deserve every bit of any ass-kicking he gets. Not even waiting until after a person's been found guilty for sure? That's just making trouble, no matter what else he claims it to be.
We have newspapers locally for sale that show peoples mugshots, I dont see how this is any different.
Because you can't pay the newspaper not t publish it, or at least shouldn't be able to do that. Whether legal or not this is certainly not ethical. If he is going to publish this information that's fine if it's legal but there should be no option to have it removed.
So people who are acquitted can sue the pants off him?
No because he isn't publishing anything but facts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Clearly my understanding of the law is much better than yours, but thats not my fault, is it?
