• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Virginia woman arrested for blogging about the police

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
imported post

Last year there was a lot of concern about SSN's being available from the Clerks office, online.

I talked to the owner of the Va Watchdog about publishing the social of all Hanover's officers as well as their addresses. They would have the online requirements changed quickly. It's easy enough to get ...LEGALLY.

BJ and I both agreed it was improper to publish the Deputies information. I decided not to publish any of the retaliatory information, including salaries (Yes Officers saliries are FOIA able if over ten grand).

BJ took the middle ground and published pay for the entire county but left the Deputies names blank. She also published the SSN' on record of several public servents, but not Deputies.

That prompted the General Assembly to pass a bill to prevent it. She beat them in court on appeal...so yes it is legal, but should be, used with considerable descretion.

As much fun as it is rattle a cops chain now and again, endangering his family is NOT ETHICAL or in anyone's best interest.

So yes, what this woman did was legal...but IMHO....not right.
 

Sheriff

Regular Member
Joined
May 19, 2008
Messages
1,968
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

peter nap wrote:
So yes, what this woman did was legal...but IMHO....not right.

Let's compare this to Open Carry.

We know the presence of an exposed firearm scares a certain segment of the population to death. And that segment in 2009 America is anti-gun and usually the majority, not the minority. We also know it lights the fuse in loose cannons who do not know the law. Lighting this fuse just begs for confrontation. But we insist on openly carrying a firearm anyway. Because it's legal, and a right not exercised is a right lost.

So, would the same opinion apply here? Open carry is legal.... but.....not right.

Would we want a judge convicting us for legal open carry simply because it isn't the right thing or politically correct thing to do?
 

Xeni

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
243
Location
Dumfries, Virginia, USA
imported post

Sheriff,

Good way to argue the point.

I'm actually probably in the small minority here that believes that our CHP information *should* be publically accessible. I believe that if you have a reason to hide your CHP (stalking victim, etc.) that you can select an option on your form and it'd get reviewed by the Judge along with all the other information to exempt you from public disclosure.

I believe govt should be more transparent and less. And, while I support VCDL on many, many of it's fights - I don't agree on the CHP issue.

If you draw a salary or get a check from the government - your info should be public - regardless of your 'position'.
 

TexasNative

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
856
Location
Austin, TX
imported post

I understood you all the way up until you wrote this:

Xeni wrote:
If you draw a salary or get a check from the government - your info should be public - regardless of your 'position'.
I don't draw a salary or get a check from the Commonwealth of Virginia. So tell me again why my name and address as a CHP-holder should be publicly available?

~ Boyd
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

TexasNative wrote:
I understood you all the way up until you wrote this:

Xeni wrote:
If you draw a salary or get a check from the government - your info should be public - regardless of your 'position'.
I don't draw a salary or get a check from the Commonwealth of Virginia. So tell me again why my name and address as a CHP-holder should be publicly available?

~ Boyd
He was talking about the case the OP referenced, not the Free-Lance Star publishing CHP holder info.
 

TexasNative

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
856
Location
Austin, TX
imported post

That may be what he meant, but that's sure not what he said...until the last paragraph.

~ Boyd
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

TexasNative wrote:
That may be what he meant, but that's sure not what he said...until the last paragraph.

~ Boyd
Well, I guess you're right. I've had to read that post several times to conclude that perhaps the poster is just confused.

First he says "our CHP info", then he makes the non-sequitur "If you draw a salary or get a check from the government - your info should be public - regardless of your 'position'.".

While that's a sentiment I agree with, I don't see how it applies to CHP holders, whose info should be kept private even if it is not, IMO.
 

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

Xeni wrote:
Sheriff,

Good way to argue the point.

I'm actually probably in the small minority here that believes that our CHP information *should* be publically accessible. I believe that if you have a reason to hide your CHP (stalking victim, etc.) that you can select an option on your form and it'd get reviewed by the Judge along with all the other information to exempt you from public disclosure.

I believe govt should be more transparent and less. And, while I support VCDL on many, many of it's fights - I don't agree on the CHP issue.

If you draw a salary or get a check from the government - your info should be public - regardless of your 'position'.

Perhaps, then you think all the info on your driver's license should be made public, as well, including your address and whether you need corrective vision? After all, what's the difference? One is a license to drive a car, another to carry a concealed handgun.

They're both documents issued by the state, and they both have your personal information on them. I guess you don't think the state has any obligation to keep your info safe.
 

Xeni

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
243
Location
Dumfries, Virginia, USA
imported post

Tomahawk,

The majority of that information is public and can be discovered fairly easily. As for the govt having a duty to 'protect' that information..is that akin to the duty the govt has to keep me safe and alive?

Working in the computer security field I can tell you that I don't trust the safety/security of any information I give to a government agency.

To clarify on my earlier post - I don't care that my CHP information is public and I believe it should continue to be so. In terms of the salary or other 'sensitive' information about public servents - I have no issue with that information being part of the public domain.
 

zigziggityzoo

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
1,543
Location
Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
imported post

Xeni wrote:
Tomahawk,

The majority of that information is public and can be discovered fairly easily.  As for the govt having a duty to 'protect' that information..is that akin to the duty the govt has to keep me safe and alive?

Working in the computer security field I can tell you that I don't trust the safety/security of any information I give to a government agency.

To clarify on my earlier post - I don't care that my CHP information is public and I believe it should continue to be so.  In terms of the salary or other 'sensitive' information about public servents - I have no issue with that information being part of the public domain.

If I know your name and what city you live in, I can look you up by your tax records and find out how much you pay in property taxes, what your house last sold for, and (quite obviously) your home address.

Most of the time, I can get away with just a name, because google will do the rest of the legwork for me.

All of this information is freely available, many times online, too.

All she did is post it in a place visible to the officers. It's no worse than what their own hometown is doing to them, they just didn't see it there.

Are they going to charge their local City with the same?
 

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

Xeni wrote:
Tomahawk,

The majority of that information is public and can be discovered fairly easily. As for the govt having a duty to 'protect' that information..is that akin to the duty the govt has to keep me safe and alive?

Working in the computer security field I can tell you that I don't trust the safety/security of any information I give to a government agency.

To clarify on my earlier post - I don't care that my CHP information is public and I believe it should continue to be so. In terms of the salary or other 'sensitive' information about public servents - I have no issue with that information being part of the public domain.

So then your answer is "Yes, they should post all driver's license information for anyone to look at."

Just for the record, I don't like the idea of asking permission to use my car on a road I paid for, nor do I like asking permission to excercise my right to bear arms in the fashion I choose.

But as long as these maggots are making me do it, they might as well not post it on a billboard.
 

bohdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
1,753
Location
Centreville, Virginia, USA
imported post

Not so long ago there was a incident involving a certain poser ahem poster here that go along the same lines. That person claimed they were stalked, when in fact that wasn't the case. E-stalking. Research. Biographies. Guess it depends on if you are alive or dead as to the severity of it all eh?

One could argue that amassing the breadcrumbs someone left about themselves into one place is malicious. One could also argue that if you voluntarily apply for a line of dangerous work, and you are in fear of what people might do to retailate against you for whatever reason in the future, you keep a low profile. That's just common sense.

If you lack common sense, and you keep a high profile, and you are sloppy in your methods, then you have no one but yourself to blame if someone comes along and does research on you and posts your collected information in one spot. If this puts your life in danger, you should have thought about that prior to using the same screen name on every internet forum known to man.

Another way to look at this is from a network/IT security point of view. If you build what you perceive is a "rock solid" firewall, and you test it, you do not have an impartial view of how good or poorly your security actually is. If you ask (or in many cases don't ask) you will eventually find out where your flaws are - because someone will get around to exploiting them. If they are nice, they will show you. If they are not, they might black mail you. Varying degrees of being informed but you still get informed.

To hold this lady accountable for the stupidity of those officers is ludicris. Look at it this way, if SHE could find that information out, don't you think the criminals already had them pegged? "One of the thugs said "yeahsss, dez dee-tectives!" "
 

kenny

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
635
Location
Richmond Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

Having grown up in the same area you would have to be really stupid not to know who some of the undercover officers are. Of course I am assuming that everyone pays attention to their surroundings at all times.

I remember a college classmate who was undercover. On a few occassions we purchased gas at the same location. His credit card had VSP printed after his name, which was a dead give away in my opinion.

This woman was perhaps a lover scorned and some of us know about hell hath no fury. Personally I think it boils down to a case of male anatomy envy!
 

bohdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
1,753
Location
Centreville, Virginia, USA
imported post

Opsec is opsec. If you don't want people to know what it is you do, don't talk about it, don't dress like it, on and on. Her being a scorned lover or anything else still does not excuse sloppiness, and that is really what it comes down to.

You could look at it this way, what if she wasn't a lover, but just a regular person or perhaps a concerned tax payer who wanted to prove a point? Is it still harassment then? What if she had taken it to the police - "Hey, your UC's are sloppy, what are you going to do about it?" and it got ignored? Is posting the information then harassment?

Fact is, people talk, about everything. Even when they aren't supposed to. So when an officer offers information, who's to blame? If they had done everything right, would this lady still know enough to do what she did? I think that is the real question.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
imported post

The issue I still have is, what purpose did her blog serve. Sure, all the cops were light cover. But why put their information all over the internet when they weren't doing anything wrong?

Why put anyone's information out in public without a reason?

It's like the protestors that set up outside of a Veterans funeral. They have a legal right to do so.... but what miserable, thoughtless sons of a bitchs would do such a thing.

I have a picture in my files of a member here, showing his badge and ID to another member. I could put it on my site and it is an interesting picture. Why in hell would I do it though.

There should be a purpose in some things, otherwise I'd be as bad as the MMM's, or heaven forbid, the Government.

Legalities be damned, we have to set our own standards of right and wrong.
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
imported post

Xeni wrote:
Sheriff,

Good way to argue the point.

I'm actually probably in the small minority here that believes that our CHP information *should* be publically accessible. I believe that if you have a reason to hide your CHP (stalking victim, etc.) that you can select an option on your form and it'd get reviewed by the Judge along with all the other information to exempt you from public disclosure.

I believe govt should be more transparent and less. And, while I support VCDL on many, many of it's fights - I don't agree on the CHP issue.

If you draw a salary or get a check from the government - your info should be public - regardless of your 'position'.
Should other permission slips, such as the drivers license, also be public knowledge?
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
imported post

peter nap wrote:
The issue I still have is, what purpose did her blog serve. Sure, all the cops were light cover. But why put their information all over the internet when they weren't doing anything wrong?

Why put anyone's information out in public without a reason?

It's like the protestors that set up outside of a Veterans funeral. They have a legal right to do so.... but what miserable, thoughtless sons of a bitchs would do such a thing.

I have a picture in my files of a member here, showing his badge and ID to another member. I could put it on my site and it is an interesting picture. Why in hell would I do it though.

There should be a purpose in some things, otherwise I'd be as bad as the MMM's, or heaven forbid, the Government.

Legalities be damned, we have to set our own standards of right and wrong.
Agree 100% but is what was done illegal? Remember she was not given a severe tongue lashing for being an idiot, she was criminally charged.
 

bohdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
1,753
Location
Centreville, Virginia, USA
imported post

peter nap wrote:
The issue I still have is, what purpose did her blog serve. Sure, all the cops were light cover. But why put their information all over the internet when they weren't doing anything wrong?

Why put anyone's information out in public without a reason?
--- Maybe she did it just because she COULD. For some folks, there doesn't have to be any other reason. They don't require your approval, they don't care what you think, and there is nothing you can do legally to stop them. Sort of like getting someone in front of a magistrate. If you tell a convincing enough story, you can have someone picked up for very little and hauled to jail. There is nothing you can do about it until after you have been in front of the magistrate. You could resist, but that would complicate matters. ---
Legalities be damned, we have to set our own standards of right and wrong.
- I don't disagree. Some folks won't give a rats @ss about your standards, because they don't have to in a free society. Some might see that asthe problem.
 

Sheriff

Regular Member
Joined
May 19, 2008
Messages
1,968
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

Thundar wrote:
Should other permission slips, such as the drivers license, also be public knowledge?

If you blow up a copy of it and put it on the back of a tactical vest, or put it on a SWAT bag you carry to and from your car, or hang it on your belt between your badge and gun.... the answer is yes.

You can't be an undercover driver if you freely display your driver's license. :D
 

Deanimator

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
2,083
Location
Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
Come on now... Please use just a little common sense. :?
You first. How about this:

An abused woman moves out, and gets a restraining order against her husband as well as a CCW credential of some kind.

The local newspaper publishes that she has a CHL, along with her location.

He now knows where she is and that he should ambush her rather than confront her.

But it's ok because she's not a cop, right?

Newspapers here in Ohio did that crap until legislation was passed making it much harder to do. It's suspected that at least one store owner was ambushed after his CCW status was published. But it's ok because he wasn't a cop, right?
 
Top