Judge Demands Disclosure of Private Facebook Photos

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

"Well, as you can see detective, I have installed locks on my doors and curtains on my windows. Therefore, you cannot enter and search for these alleged 'bodies'. It would be a violation of my privacy."

If you don't want the world to know you did it:

1. Don't do it.
2. Don't take pictures of it.
3. Don't put said pictures on the internet.

Akisa:

CardinalPiggles:
Who needs privacy when you have nothing to hide?

Idiot.

Sure, let me get access to your house and bank account to make sure you're not doing anything illegal.

If by access, you mean look at without touching or interfering then go right ahead.

It seems disingenuous to claim permanent injuries while refusing to show photos that may support or refute the claim. Anyhow, privacy is an iffy basis here. If you are doing something out in public and you end up in someone's picture, is that an invasion of privacy? If someone witnesses me going for a run in a city park, that's certainly not an invasion of privacy. Where is the distinction between that and a photo drawn? Now these photos which have been shared with almost 900 people are considered private?

TheBobmus:
She is wrong, the court is right. Such photos are relevant to a court case, and access to them does not constitute a violation of privacy.

Yeah pretty much this. There are times when you have to hand over private information, and that is when a proper court order has been obtained. The problem effecting most online privacy rights these days is that law enforcement, government, and corporations are trying to implement rules that forgo this longstanding standard of checks and balances.

The FBI or RCMP can actually listen to your phone calls, but first they need to go before a judge and explain their justification for doing so. Sometimes that will let the criminal get away while the cops are tied up with paperwork, but it's set that way for a reason.

In this particular case I don't see a problem. Those photographs can be considered a decisive evidence in a court case like that.

I remember a timewhen "private" meant, "something you DON'T show/tell 890 people. Something you probably only show/tell to your spouse and/or doctor."

At what point in time did private start meaning, "Somethign I will show to 900 people but you have to respect me not wanting to show you"?
Fry this bitch.

Andy Chalk:
Judge Demands Disclosure of Private Facebook Photos

"Facebook privacy" is not the same or equivalent to legal privacy. Sorry, lady, you done screwed up. It's like the folks that think Constitutional "free speech" is the same as "the ability to say whatever you want on a forum without getting banned."

The 5th amendment is the same in Canada as the U.S.A. and she should not be forced to disclose photos that the government cannot readily get ashold of any more than revealing a password for a PC that might have incriminating evidence, which was recently ruled to be the case in two trails.

Her lawyer sucks ASS.

Siege_TF:
The 5th amendment is the same in Canada as the U.S.A. and she should not be forced to disclose photos that the government cannot readily get ashold of any more than revealing a password for a PC that might have incriminating evidence, which was recently ruled to be the case in two trails.

Her lawyer sucks ASS.

That's fine, she can plead the 5th if she wants. All that means is the court would subpoena Facebook for the photos.

Tried to feel bad for her, realized she's frivolously suing someone. Although it's coincidental how she goes to the university right down the street from me, British Columbia, fuck yeah!

Halfstache:

Siege_TF:
The 5th amendment is the same in Canada as the U.S.A. and she should not be forced to disclose photos that the government cannot readily get ashold of any more than revealing a password for a PC that might have incriminating evidence, which was recently ruled to be the case in two trails.

Her lawyer sucks ASS.

That's fine, she can plead the 5th if she wants. All that means is the court would subpoena Facebook for the photos.

If the court's decided she must give them, it's at that point ain't it?

In all fairness, it serves her right for lying in front of court to get compensation.

PSA: When claiming disability when you know you're a fraud, don't be stupid and post pictures on the internet of you doing things you claim you aren't able to do.

No, wait a minute. Please do this. Please do this over and over. You're stupidity will force you to get back to work and stop scamming others by forcing us to pay for your fake disability. There are plenty of people out there that actually need these services to survive. I'd like to shake this idiot's hand. :P

Nothing wrong here. They have valid legal reasons for demanding she show them and her reluctance to do so suggests her case may well be based on that of greed and not truth.

Dastardly:

Andy Chalk:
Judge Demands Disclosure of Private Facebook Photos

"Facebook privacy" is not the same or equivalent to legal privacy. Sorry, lady, you done screwed up. It's like the folks that think Constitutional "free speech" is the same as "the ability to say whatever you want on a forum without getting banned."

And even if it was, court order frequently trumps legal privacy. After all, that's essentially what a warrant is.

If physical pictures were relevant to another case, the court would have a right to see them (in some cases, the law is kind of sketchy on this point but there is precedent) and I have to say I think I side with the court. Since these photos would show whether or not she is lying, they are relevant to the case.

Do you know what I do when I don't want people to see pictures of me on facebook? I don't put those pictures up.

'Court demands relevant evidence for case that would otherwise remain private.'

Yep, shocking. This is completely different to the instances of US employers demanding the passwords to their employees FB accounts, I don't understand why it's being made out to be a similar violation.

I think it is clear that search of her photos is relevant to the case. There really isn't anything else to argue about.

Hmmm, well in this case I'd think that they should only be able to seize that information during a criminal proceeding, when they have a warrent. This is a civil matter, at least in it's current form.

What's more the nature of claims based on photos like that are ambigious to begin with, just as they are in insurance cases. Unless someone is making a claim of being bed ridden or something, being able to engage in occasional physical activity is more or less meaningless. Photos of the person at their best mean nothing since by definition nobody is taking pictures of themselves (or being snooped) when they are say laying in a fetal position on their bed, wracked with pain.

When it comes to disabillity, being fine 95% of the time is enough to make you unemployable because that 5% of the time means everything to a boss. If you say can't do your job 1 day out of 20 because of some problem whether it's physical or psychological that's enough to be fairly considered disabled since nobody is going to put that person on payroll knowing that, or not fire them due to the problem... excepting cases where it's a "workplace" injury, keeping a job when your disabled is one thing, but finding a new one is differant. For example when I became disabled and my problems started effecting my job it took quite a bit to get rid of me, even when they decided they wanted to.

Akisa:

CardinalPiggles:
Who needs privacy when you have nothing to hide?

Idiot.

Sure, let me get access to your house and bank account to make sure you're not doing anything illegal.

That's not privacy, it's security. The right to not look like an ass in front of strangers is different to the right to not have your money stolen.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here