Quote:
Originally Posted by speakingtohe
Was the guys bragging not a confession. Many people are accused and or convicted on a confession even if they did not actualally do what they confessed to. If a person confesses to a crime and the police lock him up are they then sued for slander whether he did it or not? Often the false confessor is charged with obstruction of justice.
Not saying Goodkind handle it the best way, should have brought charges and let the press handle the publicity. Put him on public record as a criminal if possible. That is what I would do if someone went into my apartment and stole my stereo and was bragging about it in the bar. Apples and oranges perhaps, but both non-violent crimes.
And perhaps if the pirate is unhinged enough he might do terrible things to Goodkind in revenge, are we seeing this guy as the psychopath and as the victim at one and the same time? I am a tad confused on the concept. Is Goodkind the instigator or the victim who had the jam to fight back?
Should we as individuals or as a society let people do as they please with our property, intellectual or otherwise out of fear that they will sue us or worse? Not a big believer in anarchy as the prevalent social structure myself, but maybe it has merit I am unaware of.
Helen
|
It's sort of how I feel. Here in Canada we are encouraged to not take action into our own hands. I don't know if it would be legal to do the hypothetical "John Smith is a thief" marching up and down his house, even if he responded, "darn right, and I'm proud of it." I'd be likely the one with the cuffs on and jailed. What if John Smith claimed he stole my guitar because I had allegedly dropped an anvil on his piano?
But if this "get the posse to shame the guy" actually has real, and longer than short-term results, and less expensively than a valid "crime case" would, then maybe it stands a chance of being taken seriously.