Re: OPEN UP THE GOVERNMENT IN DEARBORN -- Dearborn County Public Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5, 6, 7, 8 ]

Subject: Re: OPEN UP THE GOVERNMENT IN DEARBORN

Author:
Higgins

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 01:24:30 08/28/12 Tue
In reply to: anonymous 's message, "Re: OPEN UP THE GOVERNMENT IN DEARBORN" on 15:15:15 08/26/12 Sun

I have not "fallen" for anything, nor am I driven by hatred except for the disregard for the constitution. The prosecution in this case relies for the core of its case entirely on web postings that are available for anyone to read. I have done so. Unless the reader is extraordinarily paranoid or more tender than any normal, mature adult should be, nothing in them suggests a "real threat" that would justify the charges. Furthermore, consider all of the peripheral events involving thoroughly unprofessional if not unethical behavior (using patently false 'snitch' as an excuse to act, tampering with prescriptions, interfering with representation, etc) as well as abusive bail requirements that clearly were intended to stymie any kind of effective defense. This should be sufficient to suggest to anyone with a modicum of sense that this was a vindictive prosecution intended to muffle the exercise of first amendment rights.
I don't doubt that Dan is no joy to deal with, but that neither excuses the behavior of our officials nor the whimpering of those who would defend their actions.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]