Once Again, A Court Overturns Internet Ban For Convicted Criminal

from the so-can-we-stop-issuing-these-bans? dept

For nearly a decade now, we've been questioning the wisdom of punishing a criminal who used the internet as part of their crime, with a ban from internet access. With the internet becoming so integral to everyday activity, it almost seems impossible to ban them from getting on the internet at all. Does it mean they can't use a smartphone (or even a featurephone)? Can they not use VoIP? It really makes very little sense. Thankfully, it seems like most of these bans get overturned. All the way back in 2002, we wrote about a court overturning such a ban, saying that it was an "unfair encroachment on his liberties." In 2007, a similar ban was overturned. Earlier this year, another such ban was overturned as being a restriction on the guy's free speech.

And yet, the courts seem to keep giving out these bans. So, yet again, we have a story of a 30 year computer ban being overturned. And again, the court found that such a ban seems to go way too far. In this case, it was deemed "substantively unreasonable" and "aggressively interferes with the goal of rehabilitation."

So, at what point do judges stop giving out these kinds of bans in the first place?

Filed Under: criminal, internet ban


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 5 Apr 2010 @ 11:32am

    Bans

    I wouldn't think that computer bans are bad per say, and could be more akin for having your license pulled when driving. It wouldn't stop you from riding with someone else, or taking a bus, or taxi, or any number of other forms of transportation.

    What I can see with internet control would be a court ordering some control. So that you can still get a VIOP phone with your cable, but the computer being there only for work and living requirements. (Email to family, paying bills, looking for work, banking, ect and so on.)

    The only problem I can see with that is how you would enforce such a ban, or that it would even be possible. Between working with phones, work computers, rebooted ATMs running a win98 login, and library computers it would get nearly impossible.

    More then like the best option was be to state that a parole officer should set limits and then do their own work to try and help. (For crimes that don't involve outright murder, rape, vilance, or large amounts of money I tend to support aggressive rehabilitation.)

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Techdirt Logo Gear
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.