Florida Man Sues WikiLeaks For Scaring Him 340
Stoobalou writes "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been accused of 'treason' by a Florida man seeking damages for distress caused by the site's revelations about the US government. From the article: 'David Pitchford, a Florida trailer park resident, names Assange and WikiLeaks as defendants in a personal injury suit filed with the Florida Southern District Court in Miami. In the complaint filed on 6th January, Pitchford alleges that Assange's negligence has caused "hypertension," "depression" and "living in fear of being stricken by another heart attack and/or stroke" as a result of living "in fear of being on the brink of another nuclear [sic] WAR."' Just for good measure, it also alleges that Assange and WikiLeaks are guilty of 'terorism [sic], espionage and treason.'"
Suing the wrong person (Score:5, Insightful)
Citizen (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Suing the wrong person (Score:5, Insightful)
no. "shoot the messenger" is a time honored tradition in society. why stop now?
Re:What's next? (Score:5, Insightful)
yeah. but not surprising. Yey trailer parks, the bring out the best of this wonderful country...
Seriously, how the hell can it be treason if he isn't a US citizen (or otherwise legal resident)?
Re:Suing the wrong person (Score:4, Insightful)
He should be suing Fox. I'm sure it was Fox News that inspired this fear of Wikileaks within him. Plus, they did all this after they convince him that if he steps outside of his trailer animals are going to attack him from all directions.
Re:What's next? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I'm a bit confused about the treason part.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Apparently they can. How else would they extradite him? If Federal prosecutors can convince a grand jury to indict Assange (not hard to do...the grand jury system is rigged heavily in favor of prosecutors) they can ask whichever country he is in to arrest and extradite him. Even if Assange has never stepped foot on U.S. soil.
They just have to show he committed a crime against the U.S. over the internet...such as 'conspiracy to commit espionage'. After giving Manning 'protective solitary confinment' (aka coercive torture) for enough time, they'll get Manning to claim that Assange and him worked together to get those government documents. Manning will be offered a deal for a limited amount of prison time if he serves as a 'government witness' against Assange. Given the last 7 months have been hell on earth for Manning, turning such an offer down would be incredibly difficult. Even if there is no actual communication logs showing this, the mere testimony of Manning (under duress) is a "witness statement" that a grand jury can use.
Once they get Assange dragged into U.S. custody, they can lock him up in jail for years while federal prosecutors file motions for extensions and things. Then, finally, they can give him a show trial where the jury is stacked with people who hate sex criminals. (even though Assange would not be accused of such crime, the jurors would think of him as a rapist).
Even if he were acquitted (the case as I outlined it is very weak) he would be out hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal defense fees and years off his natural lifespan. The Federal government cannot be sued to reclaim either of these things unless Assange were able to show that the government KNEW he was innocent. (which if they have a coerced statement from Manning, above, the government doesn't have to pay)
So in a nutshell : they can punish Assange severely for his actions even if they are never able to convict him of a crime. And imagine the mental anguish : Assange won't know for months or years during this process if he is going to be convicted and made to rot in prison for decades.
This kind of thing happens day in and day out in the U.S. We make more people rot in confinement than the worst despotic regimes in history. And there are many effective ways to get around the protections offered by your 'rights', making them nearly meaningless in practice.
Re:What's next? (Score:4, Insightful)
Funny how Alan Dershowitz, no less, said Palin's use of the phrase was perfectly acceptable.
It wasn't the best use of the phrase, but everybody is missing the point here. Some lunatic murders several people, and everyone points the finger at Sarah Palin. It's shameful political opportunism. I'd never vote for Palin for president, but the left must really be afraid of her if they are going to blame her for this.
Re:What's next? (Score:3, Insightful)
You and everyone else already know this. Please quit.
Re:What's next? (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, because that's the first time anyone has used an X to mark a spot, or said they are "targeting" a district. Clearly she means to communicate to her followers that she intends to shoot democrats from a helicopter. Clearly that is the truth, and you are not an insane fucking moonbat with an ax to grind.
BRB, SUING LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR THREATENING TO SHOOT ME WITH THOSE "TARGETING YOUR AREA" ANTI-DRUNK-DRIVING COMMERCIALS!!!