My first reaction to the breaking news of the jury’s award against the disgusting Westboro Baptist crew who goes around to the funerals of our fallen troops, protesting during the personal, private, heartbroken moment when the families and friends of our slain G.I.’s somberly attend to the task of planting their loved one in the ground, was “HECK YEAH!” Then, I wasn’t so sure the stifling of the 1st Amendment any further than it has already been stifled over the decades was a good idea. THEN, as I read some of the details of the trail; details of the judge’s instructions; details of this PARTICULAR protest at the funeral of Lance Corporal Matthew A. Snyder, may he Rest In Peace; I was able to find SOMETHING I could hang the proverbial “hat” upon… a reason to wholeheartedly APPLAUD the jury’s award and the Westboro crew’s demise via the 1st Amendment upon:
“… Fred Phelps took the stand after Snyder, testifying that he had not considered whether children would see a sign carried by protesters with the words “Semper Fi Fags” and two stick figures that appeared to be engaged in sodomy, according to the Associated Press. …” – Baltimore Sun
No, Sir — you can’t do that. We’re talking PG-13 here at the VERY least. While I’ve yet to have any children, I do have a couple of precious young neices between the curious ages of four and five and when I am out in public with them, enjoying their company — if you should choose to expose them to filth like that — be it anime, a painting, stick figures, words on a sign — whatever; you and I are going to have a VERY serious conversation (or more) if I have to answer the question, “Uncle, what does that mean?” And that is the ONLY item in the entire case I get behind this attack upon the 1st Amendment rights against the attackers from Westboro who attack everything decent and human with their foul actions and mouths.
There are more questionable “snippets” from the Baltimore Sun’s coverage of this civil trail, which, if the award stands, will surely bankrupt these idiots and put them out in the streets:
Man wins case against funeral protesters
Father of slain Marine awarded nearly $11 million in compensatory, punitive damages
By Matthew Dolan and Julie Bykowicz
A Baltimore federal jury awarded nearly $11 million Wednesday to the father of a Marine killed in Iraq, deciding that the family’s privacy had been invaded by a Kansas church whose members waved anti-gay signs at the funeral.
It was the first-ever verdict against Westboro Baptist Church, a fundamentalist Christian group based in Topeka that has protested military funerals across the country with placards bearing shock-value messages such as “Thank God for dead soldiers.”
They contend that the deaths are punishment for America’s tolerance of homosexuality and of gays in the military.
Relatives of Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder wept and hugged at the jury’s announcement, which came a day after closing arguments in the civil trial in federal district court.
“Now I know it’s going to be harder for them to do it to anyone else,” said Albert Snyder, who mourned at his son’s funeral in March 2006 while seven Westboro members waved signs nearby.
The compensatory damage award alone, $2.9 million, was nearly triple the net worth of Westboro and the three members on trial, their attorney said.
Fred W. Phelps Sr., Westboro’s founder, vowed to appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, in Richmond, Va.
“It’s going to be reversed in five minutes,” he said. This case, he added, “will elevate me to something important,” as it draws more publicity to his cause. …”
Something important, he says. TSK, TSK, Mr. Phelps — putting yourself above the God you quote as you wreak heartache upon your fellow man. Just what Jesus would do? I think NOT.
MORE:
“… Snyder’s lawsuit spurred a constitutional debate over how far the First Amendment should extend to protect the most extreme forms of expression.
Some legal experts said the judgment could be a setback for those who believe in broad free-speech protections.
“I think when speech is a matter of public concern it still has to be protected, even when by social standards it is extraordinarily rude and outrageous,” said UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh.
University of Maryland law professor Mark Graber said the size of award, which included $8 million in punitive damages, could have a chilling effect on speech.
“This was in a public space,” Graber said “While the actions are reprehensible, the First Amendment protects a lot that’s reprehensible.” After the verdict, Phelps and his two daughters named in Snyder’s lawsuit said they believed that it was really their religious beliefs that were on trial.
“The goofy jury threw a fit at God,” Phelps said. …”
You see, as I prefaced in my first paragraph above, this was my second thought and semi-instant concern, that is, until I read about the exposure of gay porn to children — that is what crossed the lines of one’s civil liberties infringing upon the civil liberties (not “privacy” — that’s not even covered in the Constitution) of another. If children must be escorted by a parent with full expectations of dipictions of any sort involving pornography; no man or women has a “right” to jump out in public and expose one’s child to such filth in a “surpise appearance”. Naughty-naughty, Mr. Phelps — that is what hung you and that alone is what I expect to hang you and yours yet again in your promised appeal of the jury’s verdict.
MORE:
“… The courtroom fight came down to whether Westboro had a legal right to demonstrate at Snyder’s funeral or whether the protesters crossed the line because their message impugned the grieving family’s reputation and unlawfully invaded the Snyders’ privacy.
The Marine’s father, a 52-year-old who lives in York, Pa., sued the church and three of its members, founder Phelps and two of his daughters, Rebecca Phelps-Davis and Shirley Phelps-Roper.
For Snyder’s claim of invasion of privacy to have succeeded, the jury needed to conclude that the church’s actions at the funeral — and later, in an Internet posting about Matthew Snyder on its Web site — were “highly offensive to a reasonable person,” according to the jury instructions.
Albert Snyder also contended that the church’s actions were an intentional infliction of emotional distress. Under the law, to find in favor of Snyder, the five women and four men of the jury needed to find that the church’s conduct was “intentional or reckless.”
Jury instructions also required that the conduct be “extreme and outrageous,” leading to severe emotional distress.
“You must balance the defendants’ expression of religious belief with another citizen’s right to privacy,” U.S. District Judge Richard D. Bennett instructed jurors Tuesday. …”
Disagree with the judge’s instructions COMPLETELY. There can be no expectation of privacy in a public setting. We DO NOT want to travel down this road, my friends. What I WILL say is Lance Corporal Snyder was NOT a “public figure” and the Westboro clowns’ personal attack upon him on a public website should have constituted LIBEL if not SLANDER; altogether another great reason for a handsome jury award in favor of Mr. Snyder. While I believe U.S. District Judge Richard D. Bennet had the best of intentions, the instructions he gave to the jury as quoted above, in MY not-so-humble opinion, place him alongside of many OTHER well-intentioned, activist judges who’ve bastardized our “Equal But Separate” branch of government known as The Judicial Branch.
I would almost call for disbarrment of the man for bringing up the subject of PRIVACY in a public place to the jury. These instructions cannot be confused with yelling “Fire!” in a crowded movie theater where people have the right to not be trampled to death — i.e., a matter of “the civil liberties of one causing the risk of physical danger and the civil liberties of another.” The former has no Constitutional foundation whie the latter indeed, DOES.
That’s all I’m planning on “snipping” from the three page Baltimore Sun article — read it for yourselves and decide for yourselves, but I WILL say I’m elated by the fact the Phelps’ are finally enduring a little bit of “emotional distress” of their own for once. They WILL appeal and I would hope the award stands despite the bungling of this case by Judge Bennet, on the heartless exposure of depicted homosexual pornography to young children. As for the families of the fallen themselves; that’s what the Patriot Guard Riders, of which our dear friend, Matthew O’Keefe of Papamoka’s Straight Talk is there for. That’s what state laws are there to address. This is NOT a matter for activist judges to exploit with their unconstitutional jury instructions when the two violations I stand upon in my own opinion should be more than enough to bankrupt this so-called “Church” of haters.
Last but not least, speaking of bankruptcy, the father of Lance Corporal Snyder is in great danger of facing bankruptcy himself once the appeals from the thoughtless, hateful, Westboro gang hit the courts and he might need your help in paying for further legal services. If you wish to cough up a few bucks to help this man collect his rightful belongings from these idiots from the City of Topeka, Kansas, you may GO HERE to help out: MatthewSnyder.Org. Despite the activist judge, the award was just in the end, and these people MUST be held accountable to pay up. They like to hit the streets in protest? Fine — let them protest from the streets where this award, should it stand in the end, will surely PUT THEM as the address of their new so-called “Church”.
***
H/T (in part) to MemeOrandum: Other blogger opinions — once again, it appears both Left and Right bloggers are mostly in agreement — “must reads”, ALL of them: Pam’s House Blend (Left); Firedoglake (Left); Hot Air (Right); Stop The ACLU! (Right); Michelle Malkin (Right); Captain’s Quarters (Right); Drudge Retort (Left); PoliBlog (Perhaps, SLIGHTLY left of center)
Loading ...
12:42 pm on November 1st, 2007 1
[...] Fred Phelps And Family Go Down HARD — Jury Awards $11M To Father Of Slain Marine Fred Phelps And Family Go Down HARD — Jury Awards $11M To Father Of Slain Marine » by The GTL™ in: … Religion, Civil Liberties, The Courts, Military, Iraq, Constitution, Think, Politics, National Politics, 1st Amendment Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder and his family are redeemed by huge [...]
1:47 pm on November 1st, 2007 2
I have to respectfully disagree with your post. Perhaps if you assume that cemeteries are public places you could be right. However, most cemeteries are private property and a funeral, one of the most heartbreaking and private events a family must endure, should reasonably be protected as a “private zone” even within a public cemetery such as Arlington National. I don’t think there is a valid analogous situation from either the pro or con positions vis a vis First Amendment rights.
The actions of Phelps and crew are heinous. There must be limits on the amount of verbal harm and distress one citizen can be allowed to inflict on another regardless of venue. This verdict, I think, draws a clear line on where that limit ought to be. I fervently hope the verdict is upheld.
3:08 pm on November 1st, 2007 3
This is an interesting case with even more interesting ramifications. (I’m surprised no one had sued him before. It is such a simple concept.)
Even if I had the word skills of Michael Linn Jones I don’t believe I could adequately express the utter and total contempt I feel for Phelps and his morally bankrupt, brain-washed, minions of hate. In a perfect world there would be a bounty on slime of their ilk.
I do have my doubts any monies will be payed on the suit. Since it is doubtful Phelps has any assets other than in Kansas the judgement will have to be transcripted there. His attachable assets will have to be ferreted out and nabbed. Phelps’ daughter is an attorney. Unless their license have been yanked other relatives are able to practice law. That means they have the ability to file appeal after appeal and be out nothing other than filing fees.
I wonder why the clan hasn’t been arrested for “inciting a riot.” When they are exercising their freedom of speech a violent response from the “victims” wouldn’t be a surprise – were they not so well protected by police officers.
Also, I read a news item yesterday that a man was arrested for baring his chest to expose the words, “F**k You” to someone with whom he was arguing. If those words were considered breach of peace …