Teen who allegedly got sexts from Weiner writes an open letter to Comey


#1

Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2016/11/07/teen-who-allegedly-got-sexts-f.html


#2

I know she’s only a teenager, but this bit here?

“I thought your job as FBI Director was to protect me.”

That’s as wrong as it’s possible for a thing to be. The job of the police, and the courts, is to protect society by enforcing the laws, and the police as an organization have no responsibility to protect any given particular individual.

That’s why they can arrest people and throw them in jail even when the victim doesn’t want to press charges. That’s why they can compel testimony from victims who don’t want to give it. That’s why they can arrest men on domestic violence charges even when their battered wives say “No, he’s okay, he only does this when he’s drinking.”

Weiner broke the law. The job of the police, including the FBI director if it’s a Federal crime, is to investigate that crime and provide evidence on which he can be prosecuted. It’s not to protect the victim of that crime from the media or the internet.


#3

That said, his job is not to further victimize the victim by making her the target of a media frenzy in a lunatic election cycle.


#4

Huh. You’ve got a fairly cracked interpretation of “To Protect And Serve” in your pocket.

Some guy named Jonathan L. Rudd, J.D., wrote an article on the FBI’s very own website breaking down and explaining their oath of office. He goes into detail about the Constitution and the 14th amendment in particular, but towards the end, he says this: (emphasis mine)

The most fundamental of the many checks and balances in our system of government is the power to control oneself. At no time is a commitment to this principle more eloquently expressed than when individual officers raise their hands and solemnly swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. May all of us do so with a firm understanding of the principles we have determined to defend and a clear recognition of the people we promise to protect.

So. Tell me again how the FBI isn’t actually supposed to protect people.


#5

Particularily when youths are involved.

It’s one of the reason I suspect so many sex assaults and mysogenistic acts go unreported; who wants to relive it, and face such fallout? But even that perspective can at times lead to more offences, violence, and worse. Not that I’m trying to blame the victim. Clearly, it’s a troubling position to be in.


#6

We’ve already heard lots about the stern father figure that republicans always want to sell us. And now to this already dysfunctional family dynamic, we’re seeing the kids used as pawns in a nasty mudslinging divorce campaign. In this case, I don’t think it reflects badly on Trump’s supporters, so much as reflecting badly on the mess that presidential races have now become. IF ever there were a case to be made for public financing of national campaigns, 2016 is the poster child for that cause!


#8

I feel like coverage of this is scuzzy, and I don’t want to lend my clicks to it. How exactly did her identity get out? I thought minors’ identities were supposed to be sacrosanct in these situations.


#9

I believe we just now learned of it. Victims are allowed to do that.

This seems a bit apples and oranges, but right on her for doing her thing


#10

It’s hard to take any of this seriously, since the FBIs actons have protected noone*. If you want to defend their doing a tough job well, you’d have to pick a much better example than this!


#11

I’m not sure you’re seeing the distinction between protecting people and protecting a person. Weiner broke the law, and it is the FBI’s job to protect people by amassing evidence to enable his prosecution.

And you’ve got a vacuous understanding a whole lot of case law. Courts are unanimous in this: the cops have no responsibility to protect you as an individual. If you are being assaulted, and you call the cops, and they decide to prioritize someone else’s assault over yours, or decide that they’d rather just do something else instead of putting their flashers on and speeding to protect you, and they don’t show up, and your assailant gets away, you have absolutely no legal recourse to the cops. They exist to protect and serve society, they have zero responsibility to protect Donald Petersen. Just one of many examples:

It is not the FBI director’s job to protect one of the people Weiner victimized when he violated Federal law. It is the FBI director’s job to protect society by investigating the crime so that the criminal can be charged and prosecuted.


#12

Besides all that, it’s not in the best interest of this kind of investigation to dox the victim.

Also the director of the FBI doesn’t have any responsibility to try and tamper with elections using trumped up bullshit.


#13

But not to amass such evidence in a way that further victimizes an innocent minor.


#14

Exactly. Comey’s letter to Congress is pretty clearly politically motivated. And in this case revictimizing someone is just the cost of doing business to him.


#15

Not entirely true. There’s a scumbag that sends dick-pics to minors still walking around, so they’re currently doing a fine job of protecting someone.


#16

Are they now? Did you read the article you cited? The initial trial judges agreed with you. The DC Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 to reverse that ruling for 3 of the plaintiffs. And then the en banc Court of Appeals ruled to affirm the initial ruling… 4-3, not unanimously. Now it’s established precedent, sure, but you can’t claim it’s a noncontroversial unanimous opinion defining the duty of LEOs after a 4-3 squeaker like that.

That’s as wrong as it’s possible for a thing to be.

Uh, looks like at least 3 appellate court judges disagree with you.


#17

What he’s doing is stoking partisan flames at the expense of the victim.

What he is doing is not essential at all beneficial to the American people or integrity of the case.

Not that you care about either of those or the victim.


#18

That’s because it’s held between two angels dancing atop a pinhead


#19


#20

There’s the Blue Lives Matter rule-of-law/authoritarian crowd for ya.


#21

Yep. Sad.