this is wrong.
Aug. 19th, 2009 07:53 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
acroyearLook. I hate the show Survivor. I hate the concept. I hate the concept of "reality" contests in general.
I think Richard Hatch (the winner, not the Galactica star) is an idiot. Whether he feels "guilty" or not, whether he likes it or not, he IS guilty of tax evasion. Just because a normal job has taxes withdrawn doesn't mean you aren't liable for taxes on non-normal jobs. Just because you're gay and think you've been a victim of discrimination all your life doesn't mean you aren't required to follow the law on tax and income matters.
But "Right to remain silent" (preserving my 5th amendment rights") is not "requirement to remain silent". While there are terms for which one is not allowed to talk to the media for a fee, because that is a form of employment while under imprisonment, a general "you can't talk to the media at all" decree is a blatant violation of the first amendment.
It is also unconstitutional for the cops in this latest round to withhold, from the arrestee as well as the media, the actual charges for arrest. You don't just arrest someone 'cause you don't like something and trump up the charges later. It's called due process.
Don't like it? Quit being a cop. 'cause violating that document is the most unamerican thing anybody in authority can do.
I think Richard Hatch (the winner, not the Galactica star) is an idiot. Whether he feels "guilty" or not, whether he likes it or not, he IS guilty of tax evasion. Just because a normal job has taxes withdrawn doesn't mean you aren't liable for taxes on non-normal jobs. Just because you're gay and think you've been a victim of discrimination all your life doesn't mean you aren't required to follow the law on tax and income matters.
But "Right to remain silent" (preserving my 5th amendment rights") is not "requirement to remain silent". While there are terms for which one is not allowed to talk to the media for a fee, because that is a form of employment while under imprisonment, a general "you can't talk to the media at all" decree is a blatant violation of the first amendment.
It is also unconstitutional for the cops in this latest round to withhold, from the arrestee as well as the media, the actual charges for arrest. You don't just arrest someone 'cause you don't like something and trump up the charges later. It's called due process.
Don't like it? Quit being a cop. 'cause violating that document is the most unamerican thing anybody in authority can do.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-08-19 04:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-19 04:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-19 05:09 pm (UTC)It is quite possible, in fact probable, that there is a left-hand-right-hand thing going on, but the overarching principle of the First Amendment stands: it is a violation of rights to tell him he has to shut up. You can insist he isn't paid for what he publicly says, but you can't shut him up.