California Court Rejects Attempt To Force Reporters, California Governor And Others To 'Return' Leaked Emails
from the how-does-one-return-an-email? dept
While it may not be the Snowden or Manning documents, all sorts of smaller “leaks” happen all the time. And, apparently, some people go absolutely crazy about it, such as the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Commission, which freaked out that someone had leaked 94 pages of internal emails concerning the Commission’s attempt to give the University of Southern California control over the stadium. The emails suggest that the Commission broke certain laws concerning public discussions and procedures. The response, though, is what’s fairly incredible. The Commission has been trying to argue that the leaked documents are “privileged communications” with lawyers, and therefore the LA Times (whose reporters received the documents) and various others, including California Governor Jerry Brown and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti should be ordered to “return” the documents.
Thankfully, the court has quickly rejected the request pointing out that there’s been no evidence to support the claims of the Commission, and furthermore that the entire attempt to retrieve leaked documents is “grossly overboard.”
“You’re asking me to have parties, including the governor of California, return documents sent to him?”
The judge seems to recognize the absurdity of this attempt. Clearly, if that was a reasonable move it would basically do away with any possibility of whistleblowing. Of course, now that there’s fighting over the documents, a minor scandal is getting that much more attention thanks, yet again, to the weakly attempted coverup.
Filed Under: eric garcetti, jerry brown, journalism, la memorial coliseum, leaked emails, return
Comments on “California Court Rejects Attempt To Force Reporters, California Governor And Others To 'Return' Leaked Emails”
I thought California Dreamin’ wasn’t a song by Streisand?
The emails clearly show that the Commission violated the open meetings act? There’s a confidentiality agreement between a government entity and a college, while violating the open meetings act over this agreement with USC?
I have to hand it to the commission and their lawyers, they really have some very large balls to try to pull that off that scam.
What’s really amazing, is that I don’t live in California. I would never have heard of this had not the commission tried this cover up.
Now, knowing nothing about the whole thing, other than what’s in this article here, I get to form a first impression about the whole matter and it’s participants.
Needless to say, that opinion, isn’t very high at this point dealing with this said commission. So people who had no clue, had no need to know, now do. Talk about how to form a public reputation? They could still take lessons from a few that pass through here but they are approaching the levels of absurdity that regularly pass for fodder here.
You can return email...
This is easy to do, just send the email back, delete your own copy, then delete the information from your brain by repeatedly banging your head against the wall.
Sometimes you just need to use your head…
Re: You can return email...
But if you return the email, you create additional copies of it. And once it’s “returned” how do you prove you deleted your copy?
Re: Re: You can return email...
Ask your old buddies you’ve helped into the government to make a law so that nobody has to prove a thing about anything !
With a few lies, manipulation, fake statistics, a generous amount of fallacies and some bribing, (but I’m sure you’ve never heard of those) you can save the starving artists !!.. Err what was it already.. End piracy ? Regardless, we did all that before it was even considered “cool” !
Oh, right, it was about avoiding having to prove you’ve sent back emails you stole and put on your internets, by robbing it from their internets. (We could explain you why we’re using verbs linked to thievery instead of using the verb copying, but you wouldn’t understand anyways…)
Did we mention you’re thief and a pirate ? And maybe even a tomb pillager !?(yeah that sounds much more underground! – OutOfCharacter: previous terrible pun only partly intended XD -)
Ugh, openness, fairness, integrity, laws, justice, and building ourselves a better future, that’s all way too mainstream !
Hilariously the best way to cover things up is probably to give some apology like “Yes it happened, it was ill-conceived and we are a bit embarrassed by it. Going forward we’ll correct the issues that has been shown to the public…” blah blah blah.
And now the story is dead. No one really gives a crap and life moves on.
Trying to use the power of the courts just makes you out to be some sleezebag who likes to throw his/her weight around and people start going “What horrible things did this person do?!”
Das Commision used the wrong approach...
They should have used a copyright enforcement claim instead.
Re: Das Commision used the wrong approach...
That is just crazy.