Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court whitewash? Justices ignoring law, facts in Vincent Foster photographs case
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Thursday, December 11, 2003 | Joseph Farah

Posted on 12/11/2003 12:14:28 AM PST by JohnHuang2

Supreme Court whitewash?

Posted: December 11, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

The Associated Press story covering the Supreme Court hearing on requested release of Vincent Foster crime-scene photos read as follows: "Five government investigations concluded that White House attorney Vincent Foster's death in 1993 was a suicide."

Not true.

There haven't been five government investigations. In fact, there hasn't been even one real government investigation. Instead, there have been five cover-ups, all using the same tainted evidence and the same tainted investigators.

Attorney Allan Favish believes the public may learn something from 10 unreleased police photos of Foster and has taken the issue all the way to the Supreme Court.

I believe he's right.

Color me a "conspiracy theorist" if you wish. But I go where the facts lead me. And the facts in the Foster case have never led to the conclusion of suicide in Fort Marcy Park. No matter how many government rubber stamps are placed on that theory, it will never hold water.

The Justice Department is fighting a lower-court order to release four of the photos under the Freedom of Information Act. The law allows the media and individuals to receive unclassified records the government would not normally release. Its "personal privacy" exemption does not cover surviving family members. Nevertheless, the government is still covering its behind – not wishing the public to find out it was sold a bill of goods a decade ago.

"I can think of no higher public interest than what's being argued here," said Favish. "I think the government can no longer be trusted to filter the raw evidence to the public in this case."

Favish said the government made numerous mistakes in its handling of Foster's death, and he believes the withheld photos will help prove his conspiracy theory.

Last week, a seemingly skeptical Supreme Court grilled Favish, suggesting the public is no closer to finding out the truth about what became of Bill Clinton's lawyer in 1993.

"There is a long-standing tradition of respect for the dead, for the survivors," said Justice Stephen Breyer. "It is something so deep in human nature."

In other words, it's not a matter of what the law actually says – but there's this "tradition ..."

Justice David Souter said there is a fundamental "right to be left alone." He indicated the Foster family's interest falls under the concept of privacy, and that they should not have to be "assaulted by having these photographs published."

The old right-to-privacy ... found nowhere in the Constitution.

Favish rightly pointed out it is up to Congress, not the courts, to give surviving family members specific privacy rights.

Justice Anthony Kennedy disputed the suggestion that the Supreme Court had endorsed the narrower definition of privacy in a 1989 decision protecting the confidentiality of criminal "rap sheets." Noting that the court in that case had said that traditional understandings of privacy "encompass the individual's control of information concerning his or her person," Kennedy told Favish that it was an "unfair reading" to equate "encompasses" with "consists of."

In other words, it all depends on what the word "is" means.

Even the usually reliable Antonin Scalia seemed to cave to political correctness on this issue. Scalia, who seemed to favor Favish's definition of the scope of privacy under the Freedom of Information Act, nevertheless was critical of the attorney's campaign to get the Foster death photos, at one point calling him a "conspiracy theorist" about the case.

"You have relatives here who are going to be very much harmed," Scalia said. "What is the interest on the other side? You've demonstrated some footfaults in the investigations, a mistake here and there, but who cares? Do you really think this is of significant moment for the country?"

Favish does. So do I. And no amount of name-calling by people who refuse to look at the facts is going to change that.




TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 1stamendment; 1stammendment; activistcourt; activistcourts; allanfavish; billclinton; billclintonslawyer; clintonlegacy; conspiracy; constitutionallaw; coverup; crime; crimephotos; deadmentellnotales; farah; favish; firstammendment; freespeech; josephfarah; judicialtyranny; justicedepartment; lookatconstitution; murder; nosecurityquestion; presidentclinton; publicinformation; suicide; vincefoster; vincefosterdeath; vincefosterphotos; vincentfoster; x42
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last
Thursday, December 11, 2003

Quote of the Day by woodyinscc

1 posted on 12/11/2003 12:14:28 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: archy
Vince Foster: carried out feet first, rolled up in a rug.

Now the SCOTUS sweeps the remaining evidence under it.


2 posted on 12/11/2003 12:17:38 AM PST by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: aristeides; honway; thinden; leadpenny; basil; AppyPappy
Nevertheless, the government is still covering its behind – not wishing the public to find out it was sold a bill of goods a decade ago.

Sounds like the Supremes will continue the Vince Foster cover up.

4 posted on 12/11/2003 7:33:59 AM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
Part of the job. Earl Warren chaired the Warren Commission. Owen Roberts chaired the Roberts Commission on Pearl Harbor.
5 posted on 12/11/2003 8:37:29 AM PST by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
Simple, just release the photos of Foster mwalking out of the White House on the day he died. If the government would do that, then all the 'conspiracies' would immediately vanish.

Interesting that they don't roll such tape on the evening news.

But you are correct again - I guess that the tape that once existed showed C. Livingston carrying out a rug, and Foster somehow got out of the most secure building on the planet without being caught on any video at all.

Who had access to those tapes anyway...(the killer and cleanup squad are known to the Secret Service, IMO.)

6 posted on 12/11/2003 9:09:07 AM PST by Triple (All forms of socialism deny individuals the right to the fruits of their labor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Evening BUMP
7 posted on 12/11/2003 3:02:15 PM PST by weegee (No blood for ratings! This means YOU AOL-Time-Warner-Turner-CNN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
BUMP
8 posted on 12/11/2003 8:25:45 PM PST by murdoog (i just changed my tag line)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: murdoog; AJFavish
Bump. The limited attention to this news should make sweeping it under the rug all the more easier.
9 posted on 12/11/2003 8:28:53 PM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Triple; Fred Mertz; Wallaby; rubbertramp; MizSterious; hotshot
Who had access to those tapes anyway...(the killer and cleanup squad are known to the Secret Service, IMO.)

good question!

you might ask former WH communications officer, Sharlott Donovan.

opps. scratch that. Sharlott "committed arkancide" by holding a plastic bag over her head until she expired.

10 posted on 12/12/2003 5:39:51 AM PST by thinden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
It has been a whitewash from day 1.

The S.C. is only continuing the scam.
11 posted on 12/12/2003 5:45:04 AM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thinden
Ya know come to think of it, there was an unpublicized suicide of a Secret Service officer in about this time frame.

Friend of a friend - I'll get the name and date. My friend knew him very well, but I never met him.

12 posted on 12/12/2003 10:50:43 AM PST by Triple (All forms of socialism deny individuals the right to the fruits of their labor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Triple
yeah. let me know.

iirc, there were a 3 or 4 USSS assigned to the presidential detail that went down on that plane in Idaho.
13 posted on 12/12/2003 10:58:53 AM PST by thinden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: thinden
opps. scratch that. Sharlott "committed arkancide" by holding a plastic bag over her head until she expired.

Geez! I thought I had followed the Vince Foster anomolies fairly well, but I never knew that - never saw any mention of it in even the unfiltered news outlets.

14 posted on 12/12/2003 11:02:29 AM PST by Jim Cane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Apparently Scalia saw little or no evidence of a government cover-up in the Foster case.
15 posted on 12/12/2003 11:13:11 AM PST by Taliesan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Cane
check out alamo-girl's stuff.

sharlott's unusual & untimely death was brought to the attention of FR several years ago.

don't know if you can pull them up from the archives anymore, but there was a lot of stuff posted here re: the details.
16 posted on 12/12/2003 11:48:19 AM PST by thinden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: thinden
Plane crash - Loss of USSS - yep

Strangley similar to the Brown crash as I recall.

I think the pilot or SS officer had an italian name similar to D'Ancono (the rand character)

17 posted on 12/12/2003 2:27:18 PM PST by Triple (All forms of socialism deny individuals the right to the fruits of their labor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: thinden; Jim Cane; Alamo-Girl
Downside Legacy Research Project
18 posted on 12/12/2003 5:26:16 PM PST by Wallaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Wallaby
Thank you for linking to the Sharlott Donovan project! I've received a number of inquiries lately concerning her.
19 posted on 12/12/2003 6:50:40 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Good to cross paths with you again, A-G.

BTW. do you know of anyone connected to the Bush administration committing suicide?
20 posted on 12/12/2003 6:55:54 PM PST by Wallaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Wallaby
It's great to see you, Wallaby!

And no, I'm not aware of anyone in the Bush administration committing suicide.

21 posted on 12/12/2003 7:03:10 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Wallaby; Alamo-Girl; hotshot
thanx for posting the link to a-g's sharlotte donvovan project.

almost 4 years ago. notice even NDCORUP was still "alive" on that thread.

best regards to all of you.
22 posted on 12/13/2003 2:58:56 AM PST by thinden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: thinden
Howdy! I think the Democratic "appointed" rats that are still in all levels of the Washington elite would make sure that nothing surfaces or nothing is told. Only a dead person can keep a secret.
23 posted on 12/13/2003 4:51:58 PM PST by hotshot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: hotshot; Wallaby; Fred Mertz; Alamo-Girl
...."rats that are still in all levels of the Washington elite would make sure that nothing surfaces or nothing is told."

agreed. always wondered why they held over dcia tennet and all the big dogs at justice in particular???

good experienced crooks are just hard to come by these days?

good to hear from you! hope you enjoy the upcoming christmas season.

24 posted on 12/14/2003 6:26:21 AM PST by thinden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Wallaby; archy; aristeides; Sal; mancini
Thanks for that link, Wallaby.
25 posted on 12/15/2003 6:38:44 AM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: thinden; Fred Mertz; Wallaby
I suspect that there was a deal in December 2000 under which the Democrats agreed to accept Bush as president elect. I suspect part of the deal was to ignore the crimes of the Clinton administration.
26 posted on 12/15/2003 7:55:08 AM PST by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: thinden
"you might ask former WH communications officer, Sharlott Donovan.
opps. scratch that. Sharlott "committed arkancide" by holding a plastic bag over her head until she expired."

Whoaaa, this wasn't the gal found dead in an (State Dept) office during the Clinton's 2nd term, by any chance.

...was it?

27 posted on 12/15/2003 8:04:00 AM PST by Landru (Tagline Schmagline...just a drag on my line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Landru
that state dept gal you refer to was barbara wisw, iirc.

sharlotte was WH communications officer.

if I understand the time frame of her employment in that capacity correctly, it would have included the period of VWF's death and the subsequent ransacking of his office.

non of the events surrounding foster's last day in the white house have been found recorded on video tape. nor are there any known video tapes of interlopers who cleaned out foster's personal files and took them to the WH residence.

there may have been some of the early coffes held during her tour of duty with WH communications.

I think she was gone pre-monica.
28 posted on 12/15/2003 9:06:32 AM PST by thinden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: thinden
"that state dept gal you refer to was barbara wisw, iirc. sharlotte was WH communications officer."

Alright, excellent.
Thanks a million, thinden.
It's important to keep the corpses (during Its reign) properly identified even if "accuracey" doesn't seem to carry much weight these days. {g}

"...if I understand the time frame of her employment in that capacity correctly, it would have included the period of VWF's death and the subsequent ransacking of his office."

OK, so the USSC's not permitting anyone from inquiring of the video tapes, is that about right?
If so, on what grounds could the robed morons possibly be basing their opin?

"none of the events surrounding foster's last day in the white house have been found recorded on video tape."

Why?
The WH, various rooms therein & the entire WH grounds have got to be the most video taped places on the face of earth.
Not another "memory hole." {/sarc}

"...nor are there any known video tapes of interlopers who cleaned out foster's personal files and took them to the WH residence."

Again, why?
Has anyone -- whatsoever -- ever even attempted to offer a *reason* for something as unusual as that from being so; or, is "The Question" they're stonewalling?

"there may have been some of the early coffes held during her tour of duty with WH communications."

I'd bet there were; and, a hellova lot more than that, too; except, tapes of VF & her on the days in question.
The smell's overwhelming.

"I think she was gone pre-monica."

Nothing's "pre-monica" with Clinton, only the names. ;^)

Off topic, but where in the hell have you been!?
People like yourself, BIreland, & ND (to name just a few) are the people directly responsible for making this place more than just special.
You people asked didn't just ask the tough questions; &, you then (somehow) marshalled some amazing investigative resources in an attempt to answer the questions.
Without that kind of spirit, the place has turned into something hollow.

FWIW & at the risk of sounding smarmy, you & the others have been sorely missed; so, don't remain a stranger, y'hear?

If y'all are posting elsewhere, it'd sure be nice to know where that is; &, no it's not necessary I know what handle you'd be posting under, either.
It's what's going on in those brilliant, inquisative minds I seek.

Anyway as I said, really good reading ya & even better to know you're still up to asking those qusetions.
Best of luck to you & the rest of the guys.

...& have a great holiday season, too.

29 posted on 12/15/2003 12:13:33 PM PST by Landru (Tagline Schmagline...just a drag on my line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: thinden; Landru
"that state dept gal...

Close, but Barbara Alice Wise was in the Commerce Department. She was found dead in her office on November 26, 1996, at the very end of Clinton's first term. The AP stories on the event ran very briefly, but Rivero's old website at Barbara Wise is still up and has a summary of the strange events of that weekend after Thanksgiving, seven years ago.

30 posted on 12/15/2003 8:01:45 PM PST by Wallaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Wallaby

BARBARA WISE


Was Barbara Alice Wise Tortured to Death.
 
Did Reagan era appointee, Wise, discover what was behind the illegal
contact between Bill Clinton, Ron Brown, and operatives of the Chinese
government, John Huang and Wang Jun?  John Huang, long time friend of Bill
Clinton, Democratic Party bagman and agent of the Chinese, was hired by
Commerce Secretary Ron Brown and privy to classified documents.  Ron Brown
died tragically in an airplane crash.  When John Huang left the Commerce
Department to be bagman/fundraiser for the DNC, he was retained on
contract to the Commerce Department, by Charles Meissner, Assistant
Secretary of Commerce for International Economic Policy. Under this
arrangement with Meissner, John Huang kept his security clearance and
remained in phone contact with agents of the Chinese government. Charles
Meissner has since died tragically in a plane crash.  Barbara Alice Wise
was suspected of leaking Commerce documents exposing the Chinese
espionage.  On November 29, 1996 Barbara Wise was found dead and bruised
>from  head to waist in a locked Commerce Department office.  According to 
a news report on WRC TV, he body was found partially nude. On that same
morning President Clinton inexplicably left Camp David where he was
vacationing for the weekend and flew to the White House on Marine One, the
presidential helicopter.  Questioned by reporters regarding this sudden
visit on the same morning that Barbara Wise's mottled body was discovered,
Mike McCurry, on behalf of the President, told an obvious and, as yet,
unchallenged lie: 
 
John Belmont, ABC News: President Clinton took time out from his holiday
weekend at Camp David to stop by the Oval Office this morning to pick up
some poetry.

Jerry King, ABC Reporter from the White House: "Says Mike McCurry
(Presidential Press Secretary)," 'The program for the President's January
inauguration has to be completed by Monday.  Mr. Clinton did not have some
of the books he wanted to research for example to find poetry to be read
at the event.  So, he flew in the official helicopter, Marine One, back to
the White House to pick up the books.'  [Reporter] Could the research not
have been delivered cheaper?  McCurry says, "Well, sure."
 
There have been numerous news reports that President Clinton tinkered with
his inauguration speech well into January of 1997.  As for the poem that
the President had to have that day--its as forgotten as poor Barbara
Alice Wise.  Why did the White House lie about the President's unusual
behavior that day?
 
How seriously incriminating are the documents at the Commerce Department? 
Here is James F. Hoobler, Bill Clinton's Inspector General of the U.S.
Small Business Administration writing a letter in the November 21, 1996
Wall Street Journal, a scant eight days before Barbara Wise's death.  "In
respo   Pour Nov. 5 editorial (CIA Takes Commerce Files): Let me make it
perfectly clear that no files have been taken by the CIA or any other
agency.  All files remain in my custody.  In addition, I took custody of
the safe and its contents at the request of the SBA's Office of General
Counsel, not in response to a subpoena....As for the classified documents,
Executive Order 12958, Section 4.2, prohibits disclosure without the
authorization of the agency that originally classified the document.
 
Examine these news stories filed by Reuters, Associated Pressed and UPI
respectively.  
 
12:01 p.m. Friday November 29, 1996 Reuters: Body found in deceased's
office, where the International Trade Administration has offices. Cause of
death not yet determined. Police say the city's medical examiner would
perform an autopsy to determine the cause and manner of her death. Case
being investigated by Homicide branch.  
 
5:21 PM Friday, November 29, 1996 [AP] 
 
"The name of the 48-year-old woman was being withheld 
pending notification of relatives.  District of Columbia police spokesman,
J. C. Stamps said that an autopsy was being performed." 
 
Clinton reviewing inaugural plans
                                       by Helen Thomas UPI
                                      29-NOV-1996 14:29
 
     WASHINGTON, Nov. 29 (UPI) -- President Clinton briefly interrupted 
his Thanksgiving holiday weekend at Camp David Friday with a quick trip 
to the White House to gather data he wants to study in planning his 
second  inauguration and then returned to the mountaintop retreat. 
 
     The president, still suffering from a raspy voice, and ordered by 
his doctor to rest his vocal chords, carried a   briefcase as he strolled 
to the waiting helicopter to return to Camp David. He wore a leather 
jacket and was followed by an aide carrying a huge box of inaugural 
papers. 
 
Did the President orchestrate the unusually hurried autopsy of Barbara
Wise during his mysterious trip to the White House?  Given the homicide
rate in DC, the shortage of medical examiners and the backlog of
suspicious deaths awaiting autopsy, how was the body of Ms. Wise able to
jump to the head of the line and go under the knife less than 10 hours
after being discovered.  Was the huge box of "inaugural papers" actually
Commerce Department files similar to those buried in the SBA's safe?

--------------------

A reposting of who the gal was & what happened is in order.
Wouldn't want this woman forgotten.

Both Green Dragon Tavern and WhatReallyHappened are a wealth of information, & now bookmarked.

Thanks for the info, wallaby.

...& the links.

31 posted on 12/16/2003 12:46:14 AM PST by Landru (Tagline Schmagline...just a drag on my line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Wallaby
thanx walls. your are correct.

it's been a while.
32 posted on 12/16/2003 8:35:05 PM PST by thinden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Landru; Wallaby
good to hear from you landru.

as you've just witnessed, I was a real knuckle dragger in the old days.

thankfully, there were a lot of sharpies bonded together here during the Clintonista regime.

hope we don't have a repeat of that w/ the hildabeast

best regards.
33 posted on 12/16/2003 8:40:02 PM PST by thinden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz; Wallaby
Thanks, Fred. Bookmarked.

I really miss the FR investigations that turned up so many incredibly unanswered facts. The recent linking of gov richardson and AKAL got my attention big time.

In fact take a look at http://www.akalsecurity.com/Pages/article101303.pdf. AKAL has landed a contract in October (approved by the US Congress in 2003 Defense Authorization Act) to guard U.S. Army bases in Washington, Kansas, Texas, Tennessee, North Carolina, Kentucy, Georgia and Alabama. They also are still providing security for many of our courts via a contract with US Marshalls. Akal is one of New Mexico's largest federal contractors...

This wouldn't bother me if FR's investigators hadn't tied Akal to the Scumbag, Reno and the Murrah Building in the '90s and to Richardson recently. Maybe everything's just fine, but IMO it's something to keep in the backs of our minds IF something nasty starts to develop in this country.

34 posted on 12/17/2003 9:55:41 AM PST by Sal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
Also, BIG disappointment about Scalia, one of my biggest heroes and usually our best champion in the effort to hang to our Constitution.
35 posted on 12/17/2003 9:59:04 AM PST by Sal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
bttt
36 posted on 12/17/2003 10:02:35 AM PST by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sal
Also, BIG disappointment about Scalia, one of my biggest heroes and usually our best champion in the effort to hang to our Constitution.

Before nuking Scalia, I'd wait to see how he votes. Having read other things Scalia has said during oral arguments, I'm not really surprised by his comments. He will ask some pretty off the wall questions sometimes but at least he will base his opinion on the Constitution and not some tripe like what the E.U. courts says.

37 posted on 12/17/2003 10:23:44 AM PST by COEXERJ145
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145
Good point. Thanks.
38 posted on 12/18/2003 9:02:57 AM PST by Sal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
The transcript from the Dec 3rd Hearing is now up on the US Supreme Court Website. It is in PDF format and about 50 pages long.

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts.html

39 posted on 12/25/2003 4:42:58 AM PST by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz; AJFavish; kristinn; Dave Dilegge; Angelwood; tgslTakoma; GunsareOK; ...
ping
40 posted on 12/25/2003 4:46:04 AM PST by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Taliesan
Worse. The questioning at one point went like this: You can't see the photos because you don't already have evidence of murder. But the photos might be the evidence. Well, you can't see the photos unless you have evidence of murder.
41 posted on 12/25/2003 5:14:54 AM PST by savedbygrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


42 posted on 12/25/2003 5:16:52 AM PST by Bon mots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace
That's interesting, because it's exactly what will be presented to them if Rush Limbaugh's case ends up before the SCOTUS. So I suppose we should expect the same opinions there. Just replace photos with medical records and murder with the crime of doctor shopping.
43 posted on 12/25/2003 5:24:55 AM PST by arasina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: arasina
Mr. Favish posted a thread yesterday with links to the transcript of the questioning. Search for it and read it for yourself. It sounds very much like they are going to rule against Favish.
44 posted on 12/25/2003 5:29:08 AM PST by savedbygrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
bump for later scrutiny, LOL
45 posted on 12/25/2003 5:33:44 AM PST by Hannity4prez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace
This logic didn't work in Florida with Rush's medical records!
46 posted on 12/25/2003 5:39:14 AM PST by trustandobey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
From link(pg.8):

But what's being protected here... ...sort of takes three forms,... ...and closure.

When did Oprah join the SCOTUS?

47 posted on 12/25/2003 5:53:53 AM PST by StriperSniper (Sending the Ba'thist to the showers! ;-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: trustandobey
I'm not about to defend any of the judges or justices involved in either of these two cases, but the two are entirely different.

Limbaugh is defending himself against over-zealous prosecuters who are trying to get evidence to enable them to press charges, but Favish is a private citizen, trying to get public access to covered-up crime scene pix of a dead victim.

The privacy concerns are totally different. But I'm not a lawyer (thank God) so I might have it wrong.

48 posted on 12/25/2003 9:37:48 AM PST by savedbygrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
Thanks for that link, leadpenny.
49 posted on 12/25/2003 9:19:25 PM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace
The questioning at one point went like this: You can't see the photos because you don't already have evidence of murder. But the photos might be the evidence. Well, you can't see the photos unless you have evidence of murder.

I'm sorry, but I agree with this, and it is the sort of protection you would invoke over your private life in a SIMILAR circumstance.

The family has a right to keep the photos private, unless there is probable cause a crime has been committed, then they could be seized under the 4th amendment. Apparently, no judge anywhere has yet thought there was sufficient evidence of a crime to invade the family's right to property.

This is called "a fishing expedition".

50 posted on 12/26/2003 9:57:12 AM PST by Taliesan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson