ipl-logo

Rubin Gottesman Case

878 Words4 Pages

In 1989 Rubin Gottesman was arrested for the exposure of a minor on his website X-excitement where he is the operator of. He was caught by the police who were targeting Gottesman. The police had been investigating the pornographic site owner till Gettemans made a mistake. Gottesman was asked by the police then Gottesman says that he knows nothing of the videos. Little did he know that the person he was selling Forty-nine tapes to was undercover police officers. The police officer went into the video game store asking Gottesman for tapes of Traci Lords when she was a minor, and so he went on to get them and sell the two tapes. The police officer then told Gottesman to send some tapes to Hawaii, in which did also. This what got him …show more content…

In the background of the case, it was stated that it is the court's responsibility to “weigh the the value of the speech” due to the harm it has caused. It was said that there are many forms of speech and that it should protect by whatever the subject matter is happening. This is not saying that the Circuit Court believes what this man had done was not distasteful but they feel as if they can not break the rules of their constitution. It is said that despite pornography being a serious matter that it's a protected class of speech in politics. The sides of the story went back and forth with information regarding other cases similar to it such as United States v. Thomas; but the fact is some believed that they were going by the constitution and the court is reading the situation as if he did get the speech America promises. Other believes the fact of him knowingly did this is all they really need. The conclusion of the case was that stated by the supreme court, which said it was inappropriate to invalidate the first amendment and that a sexual crime, especially against a child, is a very serious

Show More
Related
1549 Words | 7 Pages

“Poehlman's erotic e-mails cannot provide proof of predisposition because nothing he says in them helps differentiate his state of mind prior to the government's intervention from that afterwards.” (Poehlman p.6) and “The only indication in the record of any preexisting interest in children is Poehlman's statement in the hotel room that he has ‘always looked at little girls’, hardly an indication that he was prone to engage in sexual relations with minors.” (Poehlman p.6). In the case of U.S. v. Poehlman, “it was the government who initiated contact or suggestions of impropriety” (Poehlman p.7). Whereas in State v. Heitman, “it was Heitman [that]

Read More
866 Words | 4 Pages

“DNA testing in 2001 had been rejected, the Tulsa department claimed evidence had been destroyed” (Innocence Project). The Tulsa Department said his evidence was destroyed, but when the Innocence Project retested them in 2007 and proved Sedrick Courtney’s innocence

Read More
509 Words | 3 Pages

They ruled that the 1st amendment did not guarantee ultimate freedom of speech and anyone violating the government could be overthrown by the state. The historical impact that the case was made mostly from Justice Brandeis, who stated that immediate serious and evil threats should be the only ones that are taken seriously enough to strip away someone’s granted rights. Brandeis’s opinion was put to use in 1969 when the case of Brandenburg v. Ohio, which is when the court overruled the decision. Yes, there are laws to help protect the natural-born citizens of this country, but if they can be taken and maneuvered to make sure the courts get what they want, why have

Read More
1959 Words | 8 Pages

This case is also regularly cited in other Supreme Court cases and is often a deciding factor. It has been used in cases like Konigsberg v. State Bar “That view, which of course cannot be reconciled with the law relating to libel, slander, misrepresentation, obscenity, perjury, false advertising, solicitation of crime, complicity by encouragement, conspiracy, and the like, is said to be compelled by the fact that the commands of the First Amendment are stated in unqualified terms: "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble . . . . " But as Mr. Justice Holmes once said: "[T]he provisions of the Constitution are not mathematical formulas having their essence in their form; they are organic living institutions transplanted from English soil.

Read More
547 Words | 3 Pages

Citation: Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition 535 U.S. 234 (2002) U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Facts: The Free Speech Coalition which is a non-profit trade association of the pornography and adult entertainment industry in the United States filed suit, against the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 (CPPA). The child pornography prevention act prohibits and sets penalties for activities such as depicting any visual image of the sexual abuse of minors. This includes pictures, video, and even modified images with the likeness or appearance of a minor engaging in a sexual act. The Promotion, advertisement, and distribution of such works are also prohibited and have consequences.

Read More
995 Words | 4 Pages

I believe this case applies to the Criminal Justice Field because with all the protests and things being said it’s hard to really know when is the breaking point or the point where you take action. For example, if someone tweets “I hate all lunch ladies” and then decides to burn a lunch lady hat, is that person still protected under the first amendment? It’s ultimately a hard question to answer when you are stuck between what is right and what is wrong. Chief Justice Warren said, “We cannot accept the view that an apparently limitless variety of conduct can be labeled "speech" whenever the person engaging in the conduct intends thereby to express an idea” which I agree with today, in the justice field, we see quite a few cops being threatened but you cannot just shoot a cop and yell I did it to express my first amendment rights. Without this case, the criminal justice field would not have a diverse way of amending certain situation involving the first amendment also we would not have the O’Brien test.

Read More
1550 Words | 7 Pages

The constitutional issue in this case was the 1st amendment. Gregory Lee Johnson was tried for burning an American flag but the Supreme court decided he wasn’t guilty. They said that it was

Read More
1605 Words | 7 Pages

There are many stakes when it comes to very important cases that could change a person’s life forever. The individual right at stake was his freedom of speech. His rights and freedoms were tampered with which led to this being a major court case. The public’s good could’ve been at stake by being injured due to his action

Read More
490 Words | 2 Pages

The judgement in favor of Sullivan was overturned, and the Times could not be convicted of libel because the courts must prove that a person has acted with malice when making a false statement. The New York Times had the right to make false claims because they were not acting with malice. Also, in Texas v. Johnson, Gregory Johnson was convicted of burning a flag and his conviction was overturned because the “law cannot limit freedom of speech just because the thing being said is offensive or disagreeable to

Read More
904 Words | 4 Pages

In Texas v. Johnson the court ruled that courts cannot limit freedom of speech solely because the thing being said is offensive or disagreeable to others. I agree with the courts on these last two rulings when comparing them to Fields case because I believe that Fields has the right to freedom of speech even if his speech contained a false statement. I believe that Fields’ statement although morally wrong, was not an act of malaise and did not cause harm to any individual. I think that most people would agree that what Fields said was morally wrong and was hurtful to those who have fought and been injured to protect our freedom here in the United States of

Read More
604 Words | 3 Pages

In June 21, 1973, Miller was convicted on the ground of advertising the sale of what was considered by the court as adult material. He was found guilty as he broke the California Statute. The California Statute forbids citizens from spreading what is considered offensive in societal standards. The question that was being asked was that if the action of Miller was Constitution thus is protected under the law. However, he lost the case due to a vote of 5 - 4.

Read More
1674 Words | 7 Pages

Marisela Perez is a twenty-three-year-old student in the MSW program here at Southern Connecticut State University. Marisela is an United States citizen, but most of here family originated in Guatemala and El Salvador. Her primary language is Spanish, which is only spoken in her household. English became her secondary language when she transitioned into the New Haven Public school system. She was raised in a single parent house hold with her mother and four other siblings, two boys and three girls.

Read More
200 Words | 1 Pages

On the contrary, although the defendant didn’t violate those the limitations stated by the First Amendment, the First Amendment does have other limitations such as the First Amendment applies differently to students in school. As the Supreme Court ruled in the Tinker case, it states that “students are not granted an unlimited right to freedom of speech or self-expression by the First Amendment, because First Amendment guarantees must be balanced against a school’s need to keep order and their school policies. Another example is the case Bethel School District v. Fraser; in this case, high school student Matthew Fraser made a speech nominating another student for elective office, his speech involved graphic sexual metaphors. The Supreme court

Read More
337 Words | 2 Pages

This case highlighted the First Amendment condemning any limit on free speech. However, during the case proceeding, the Court had dissents for deciding when the government may restrict the First Amendment. The case spread the fact that

Read More
1204 Words | 5 Pages

The article argues that the courts should only view harmful speech in the same eyes and rule them the same as if they were conduct harms. The source then discusses how many scholars believe that freedom of speech only applies when the benefits outweigh the harms, regarding what is being said. The article does a good job of approaching the problem through a semi-neutral lens. The article clearly lets its opinion be known at times; however, it approaches the opposite side of the argument in a fair manner. The article will be incredibly beneficial because it discusses when freedom of speech should not apply with a neutral approach.

Read More

More about Rubin Gottesman Case

Related Topics

Open Document