I wanted to let everyone know, all my readers, that I’m a criminal. I don’t want to deny anything, I’ve commited a few murders, bank robberies, and also I fully admit to the stabbing at Starbusters last week. Yes, this is all truthful Mr. Lieutenant Matt Kiederlen of the DeKalb police department. I did it all, come get me.
Well, now that I’ve incriminated myself, let me share something. Why would someone do this? Why would you have any documentation paper or internet that you’ve committed a crime? “Blogs under legal scrutiny” is the title of the article I’m talking about. Basically, soon they are saying police can legally come after you for stuff you say in your blog. However, I ask, why would someone admit to something in a public place, that could incriminate them? I mean if I was going to go murder someone (not that I ever would, but hypothetically) I sure has hell wouldn’t be putting it here. Granted I don’t really agree with this whole thing, I don’t think blogs are credible, and it’s really hard to prove that something is true. Just like you don’t want to Google “smoking is good for you” because I’m sure there’s a website somewhere that says smoking is good, but how credible are they. So overall I don’t agree with police being able to prosecute according to something written in a blog, but what fool would say something in a place that anyone could see?
-
Archives
- March 2014
- April 2011
- December 2010
- November 2009
- June 2009
- February 2009
- December 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- March 2008
- January 2008
- November 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
-
Meta
I’d like to see it stand up in court. Chances are a blog is never going to be cornerstone evidence in a murder trial, but I guess it could be used as circumstantial evidence. Imagine if Scott Peterson made some blog posts that contradicted his defense. Like if he said he was going golfing in his post, but told police he was fishing. A law like this is more likely to be used in that fashion rather than: “Your Honor, the defendant admited to killing his wife in a blog post dated xxxx. By the way, we have no murder weapon, body, or DNA evidence.”
Yea, true. really blogs can only give police a lead to a possible case. i mean someone searching the web may tell mr Kiederlen about this blog, and me admitting to all that, but soon they’ll realize its not true. or maybe they wont?