Judge Takes Paper To Court Over Online Comments

[babsbunny]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125816869&f=1002&sc=igg2

by Dan Bobkoff

The judge presiding over a high-profile serial killer case in Cleveland is now herself under scrutiny after her e-mail address was linked to dozens of comments on the Cleveland Plain Dealer's Web site.

Some comments were about ongoing cases she's hearing, including that of Anthony Sowell, who's suspected of killing 11 women. Now, Judge Shirley Strickland Saffold is suing the newspaper for $50 million, saying it violated her privacy.

The commenter used the name "Lawmiss" and posted more than 80 comments on the site. But the comments raised the suspicions of an online staffer at the Plain Dealer, who, when investigating the pseudonym, stumbled on an e-mail address linked to Saffold.

[hobbit709]

1. Not too bright.

And who shares an email address with their 23 year old daughter? sounds like someone is trying to pass the buck.

[mercuryblues]

4. What 23

What 23 YO would share an email account with their mother? The judge is a liar and needs to step down completely.

[blogslut]

2. Hmm

The information in the article isn't quite clear but from what I read, the judge was identified by her username. In other words, the reporter didn't delve into eyes-only back-channels. She just put two and two together. That's not an invasion of privacy.

[TexasObserver]

3. Unethical AND stupid.

[Robb]

5. Nuisance suit, the paper is protected

...Amusingly, by Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act of 1996: "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider....no cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law that is inconsistent with this section."

If it's in the comments section, the paper's off the hook.