Blagojevich Ordered Not To Live Tweet His Own Trial
from the stay-quiet dept
Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich hasn’t exactly been one to stay quiet since being removed from office and charged with corruption. If anything, he’s worked hard to make sure that the limelight remains on him as much as possible, including participating in a variety of publicity stunts. The latest was his announced plan to live tweet his own trial on Twitter, a plan that appears to have been quickly shot down by the judge in the trial, who banned him from tweeting from the courtroom. He is allowed to do what he wants outside of the courtroom, though the judge warned him that anything he says could come back to haunt him in court:
The ex-governor will be allowed to continue speaking with the media and appearing on radio programs — at his own peril.
Zagel told Blagojevich that his sound bites, quips and “repeated public statements” to the cameras could be used against him if he testifies during the trial.
“I’m quite sure it has been explained by his attorneys,” Zagel said.
While we’ve seen stories about jurors tweeting, this is the first I can remember of a defendant wanting to live tweet his own trial…
Filed Under: rod blagojevich, trial, twitter
Comments on “Blagojevich Ordered Not To Live Tweet His Own Trial”
I think that defendants should have a right to have a trial recorded and served online (not under any copy privilege restrictions) for everyone to see. A plaintiff always has the option of not pursing the lawsuit if s/he wants privacy, but a defendant has no option of not accepting the lawsuit or the consequences thereof. So if the legal system mistreats a defendant, where the burden of proof should be on the plaintiff to show damages, then the defendant should have a right to let the world know.
That’s wonderful. Let’s allow all rapists the right to make their trials public so that the victim has to face the entire world if he/she wants justice.
Yes, this is an extreme case, but I think it demonstrates that you clearly haven’t through about this long enough. There’s numerous ways this can be misused.
Re: Re: Re:
Perhaps if the identities of both sides are concealed and the faces blurred out?
Re: Re: Re:
U hit the nail on the head AC! And there are alot of asses out there that would do exactly that
“So if the legal system mistreats a defendant,”
Certainly you are not implying that Blago has been mistreated … if so, why not just say it?
UUmmmmm ID10T Error
Did anyone see Celeb Apprentice? The guy can’t even text or email and he wants to tweet the trial? LMGDAO
Yes, even the rapists have the same rights. Innocent until proven guilty. Yes, its a horrible crime, no that does not mean we should compromise anyones rights on the SUSPICION of it.
So, after Blago is thrown into the big house – will he be allowd to tweet?
If so, then would he be a tweety bird ?
Nope. Stool pigeon….
am i not correct in saying the sixth amendment says we are guaranteed to a speedy and public trial?
so even if you murdered a man and plan to plead guilty, if you want it public that is your choice.
The 6th amendment does not guarantee the right to Twitter
I mean really! Allowing the defendant, attorneys or anyone involved in the case to using any form of social media would prove to be a distraction and detract from what is at hand. If you make it okay for the defendant to Twitter, then where do you draw the line. And the trial is public by virtue of an audience and the transcript being available. Public does not equal splashed all over media outlet. There was no internet or TV when the constitution was written.