Apparently if you live in Ohio, you better be darn careful who you blog about. If you happen to publish
by getting no visitors, no phone calls, and solitary confinement. Who says there's
? Not this judge.
Now I better be careful even typing this on the internet. Of course, the Supreme Court did rule 60 years ago that there is a first amendment and that people can specifically publish things about judges that might make them "unpopular," but that clearly doesn't apply in this case.
So bloggers, be careful -- you, too can get thrown in jail if you piss off a judge. Hey Judge Markus, bite me. Are you going to come arrest me now, too?
1
Yikes. Boy, sure a good thing that we have that Constitution thingamagig... somewhere... hereabouts... wait, I thought it was here a minute ago...
Posted by: The MaryHunter at August 16, 2005 07:44 PM (SRaIZ)
2
You still have one of those? I thought they were only in archaic libraries and not actually used any more...
Posted by: Ogre at August 16, 2005 08:28 PM (L0IGK)
3
The judge can bite me too, while he's at it.
Posted by: Fitch at August 16, 2005 10:17 PM (Hn838)
4
Thanks for blogging about this story. It's tied in with our claims about widespread contract steering in Ohio (kinda like "coingate" and the BWC travesty where the state of Ohio lost $215 million on bogus "investments")
We made the news up here too...
check it out:
http://www.wkyc.com/video/player.aspx?aid=14346&sid=38099&bw=
Posted by: Bryan DuBois at August 16, 2005 11:20 PM (kLr6V)
5
Careful, Fitch, you might be setting yourself up for some jail time (in solitary confinement, incommunicado) if you're not careful!
And Bryan, you bet! Wait, did you just claim that Ohio lost money in bogus investments? Sounds like you're headed for some jail time, too! Quite clearly there's no freedom of speech in Ohio -- remind me to stay the heck out of that state in my travels, would ya?
Posted by: Ogre at August 17, 2005 08:16 AM (/k+l4)
6
Okay, this just pisses me off. What the fuck? With the way all the judges have been acting of late I'm pretty sure that they view the constitution as nothing more then cheap toilet paper.
Posted by: Contagion at August 17, 2005 09:00 AM (Q5WxB)
7
Contagion, you're assuming these judges actually know about this ancient, archaic thing called the Constitution. I don't think most of them would recognize it if you hit them upside the head with hit.
Worse, I don't know anything that can be done these days, because the legislatures incorrectly allow the judges to continue their rein of terror -- all the legislatures need to do is ignore a judge once. That's the entire idea behind checks and balances. If the legislature and the executive branch agree that a judge is full of crap, they are 100% free to ignore them -- and they should.
Posted by: Ogre at August 17, 2005 10:01 AM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
