Wake 101
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Non-Wakeboarding Discussion

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (pesos)      Join Date: Oct 2001       08-18-2010, 12:16 PM Reply

Court finds that Westboro Church can continue to picket dead soldiers' funerals, says law aimed at them curbs their free speech.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       08-18-2010, 12:34 PM Reply   
Some people are so twisted. What I would like to see is the military roll around to there houses and picket them at home.
Old     (brettw)      Join Date: Jul 2007       08-18-2010, 12:36 PM Reply   
I'd like to see someone rent a water truck and drive by and 'powerwash' this entire group at their next protest.

It'd make a great youtube video.
Old     (pesos)      Join Date: Oct 2001       08-18-2010, 12:36 PM Reply   
These guys do their best to help:
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       08-18-2010, 12:49 PM Reply   
I would like to see someone roll by them with a F%^&ing 50 cal and mow them all down.
Old     (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       08-18-2010, 1:06 PM Reply   
The law should have been struck down and people should be applauding the judge for siding with the constitution. Society can only hope that people will have the decency to refrain from verbally abusing other people, but you don't have the right to not be offended.
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       08-18-2010, 1:16 PM Reply   
Were do their rights end and your rights(like the one to bury a son in piece) begin. With freedom comes responsiblity.
Old     (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       08-18-2010, 1:19 PM Reply   
Paul, what right(s) is being violated?
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       08-18-2010, 1:35 PM Reply   
Well unfortunatley that is the problem. They may use slander, libel, and defamation of character, but remedies can only be sought after the fact.
Old     (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       08-18-2010, 1:51 PM Reply   
I dunno, sir..from what I have seen they are very crafty in their wording. Crafty enough to avoid specifics of libel/slander/defamation and still be accusatory.
I'm pretty certain if they could be sued for libel,slander or defamation it would have already happened.
Old     (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       08-18-2010, 1:52 PM Reply   
and, I think that's part of what makes the situation so aggravating for a lot of people... legally, nothing can be done to stop them.
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       08-18-2010, 1:58 PM Reply   
It has happened.

On March 10, 2006 WBC picketed the funeral of Marine Lance Corporal Matthew A. Snyder.[71][72][73] On June 5, 2006 the Snyder family sued for defamation, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.[74] The lawsuit named Albert Snyder, Matthew Snyder's father, as plaintiff and Fred W. Phelps, Sr.; Westboro Baptist Church, Inc.; Rebekah Phelps-Davis; and Shirley Phelps-Roper as defendants, alleging that they were responsible for publishing defamatory information about the Snyder family on the Internet, including statements that Albert and his wife had "raised [Matthew] for the devil" and taught him "to defy his Creator, to divorce, and to commit adultery". Other statements denounced them for raising their son Catholic. Snyder further complained the defendants had intruded upon and staged protests at his son's funeral. The claims of invasion of privacy and defamation arising from comments posted about Snyder on the Westboro website were dismissed on First Amendment grounds, but the case proceeded to trial on the remaining three counts.[75][76] At the trial, Albert Snyder testified:

They turned this funeral into a media circus and they wanted to hurt my family. They wanted their message heard and they didn't care who they stepped over. My son should have been buried with dignity, not with a bunch of clowns outside.[77]
In his instructions to the jury, U.S. District Judge Richard Bennett stated that the First Amendment protection of free speech has limits, including vulgar, offensive and shocking statements, and that the jury must decide "whether the defendant's actions would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, whether they were extreme and outrageous and whether these actions were so offensive and shocking as to not be entitled to First Amendment protection".[78] See also Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, a case where certain personal slurs and obscene utterances by an individual were found unworthy of First Amendment protection, due to the potential for violence resulting from their utterance.

On October 31, 2007, WBC, Fred Phelps and his two daughters, Shirley Phelps-Roper and Rebecca Phelps-Davis, were found liable for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress. A federal jury awarded Snyder $2.9 million in compensatory damages, then later added a decision to award $6 million in punitive damages for invasion of privacy and an additional $2 million for causing emotional distress (a total of $10,900,000). The organization said it would not change its message because of the verdict.[79][80][81]

WBC said that it was thankful for the verdict,[82] but also unsuccessfully sought a mistrial (based on alleged prejudicial statements made by the judge and violations of the gag order by the plaintiff's attorney)[83] and also filed an appeal.

On February 4, 2008, U.S. District Judge Richard D. Bennett upheld the ruling, but reduced the punitive damages from $8 million to $2.1 million, bringing the total judgment to $5 million.[84] Liens were ordered on church buildings and Phelps' law office in an attempt to ensure that the damages would be paid.[85]

On September 24, 2009, a federal appeals court ruled in favor of Westboro Baptist Church. It found their picket near the funeral is protected speech and did not violate the privacy of the service member's family, reversing the lower court's award.[86] On March 30, 2010, the appeals court ordered Albert Snyder to pay the church's court costs of over $16,000, a move that Snyder's attorney's referred to as "adding insult to injury".[87] The decision has led to nationwide support for Snyder, with over 3,000 promises for donations to help offset the cost; Political commentator Bill O'Reilly offered to pay the entire amount of the costs on March 30.[88][89] The American Legion has also raised $17,000 to help pay Snyder's court costs.[90]

On March 8, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Snyder v. Phelps, (Docket No. 09-751, March 8, 2010).[91] On May 28, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, joined by 42 other Senators, filed an amicus brief in support of Snyder with the Supreme Court. On June 1, Kansas Attorney General Stephen Six filed a separate brief supporting Snyder. This brief was joined by the Attorneys General of 47 other states and the District of Columbia, with Maine and Virginia being the two exceptions.
Old     (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       08-18-2010, 2:10 PM Reply   
They were sued and lost- the decision was then overturned.

They were not successful with libel,slander or defamation.
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       08-18-2010, 3:06 PM Reply   
Look up certiorari.

Its not over yet.
Old     (barry)      Join Date: Apr 2002       08-18-2010, 3:30 PM Reply   
I am aware of that and I did look up certiorari because my vocabulary is lacking and I didn't know what it was.

Regardless, the review is in relation to the federal appeals court move to overturn, which was won by Snyder on invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Notice there was no mention of libel, slander or defamation. I wonder why that is...?
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       08-19-2010, 11:16 AM Reply   
oops. That was a different case that was lost.
Old     (gunz)      Join Date: Sep 2001       08-19-2010, 2:44 PM Reply   
I'm in the PGR and I hope the whole Phelps group dies in a fire.
Old     (bennn)      Join Date: Jun 2010       08-19-2010, 11:45 PM Reply   
Old     (Lawdog)      Join Date: May 2010       08-20-2010, 11:00 PM Reply   
I went to college in Topeka, KS and had to deal with those terds all the time. The problem with "fighting" them in court is the entire family is nothing but lawyers. They constantly sue anybody who challenges them. They will picket anything and everything. While doing so they will antagonize passerby's in hopes they are assaulted or their rights infringed by anyone. They do this and have somebody across the street video tape them. They have their children hold the signs for them as well. I remember seeing a child no older than 5 yrs old holding a sign saying "God Hates Fags" and "9/11 was caused by Fags". It's actually sickening to see because they will take your picture and put it on a sign and say you are a "***". If I remember right his hatred comes from his homosexual son who died of AIDS.


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 5:51 PM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home


© 2016 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us