These S.O.B.'s won't give up.

B

bowtie

Guest
Posted on Mon, Sep. 29, 2003

Paper takes autopsy photos case to court
Associated Press

GAINESVILLE, Fla. - A student-run newspaper asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday to overturn a Florida court decision that restricts access to autopsy photos - a case stemming from the death of Dale Earnhardt in 2001.

The publisher of the Independent Florida Alligator contends that a law that was passed after the star driver's death and bars public access to the records is unconstitutional.

In July, Florida's Supreme Court declined to review a decision by an appeals court that upheld a trial court's ruling.

Attorney Tom Julin said the publisher, Campus Communications, believes the trial court violated the First Amendment because it declined the newspaper's request to review the photos.

"The Alligator was trying to get the records to find out if NASCAR was telling the truth. The trial court said that was not a good enough reason," Julin said.

The Alligator and other papers asked for the autopsy photos as questions arose over how Earnhardt died and whether better safety equipment might have saved him. They also objected to the way the new law restricted access to what had been public records.

Proponents said the measure protects families from seeing their relative's autopsy photos published or posted on the Internet. Under the 2001 law, those who view or copy autopsy photos without authorization can be fined $5,000.

Jon Mills, an attorney for Earnhardt's widow, Teresa Earnhardt, said he had expected Campus Communications' request, but thought the U.S. Supreme Court would back Florida court rulings on the law.

"The state of Florida and the Florida courts have always been generous on open records and the First Amendment," but they agree that autopsy photos should remain private, he said.

He has said the photos are not usually useful to outside parties in determining the cause of death, particularly when other autopsy records are available.
 
This is not imo about Dale. It's about The First Amendment and I for one hope the Florida ruling is overturned.
 
Originally posted by 71Fan@Sep 30 2003, 04:23 AM
This is not imo about Dale. It's about The First Amendment and I for one hope the Florida ruling is overturned.
how would you like to see autopsy photos of you wife or husband on the internet ? they want them because they think it will sell their paper.

they say they want them to see if nascar is telling the truth, PLEASEEEEEEEEEEE, is the editor a pathlogist (sp)?
if tereasa is happy with the autopsy report what the hell business is its of theirs. let the man rest in peace.
 
Originally posted by de7xwcc+Sep 30 2003, 12:17 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (de7xwcc @ Sep 30 2003, 12:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--71Fan@Sep 30 2003, 04:23 AM
This is not imo about Dale. It's about The First Amendment and I for one hope the Florida ruling is overturned.
how would you like to see autopsy photos of you wife or husband on the internet ? they want them because they think it will sell their paper.

they say they want them to see if nascar is telling the truth, PLEASEEEEEEEEEEE, is the editor a pathlogist (sp)?
if tereasa is happy with the autopsy report what the hell business is its of theirs. let the man rest in peace. [/b][/quote]
The law making public documents available was put in effect as a result of a general election approximately twelve years ago and was placed there to make all public documents, information paid for with public monies, available. Prior to the voter approval of this provision, legal debate centered on the right of the public to view this information which included autopsy photos, taken at the time and paid with public funds. This was approved by nearly 90% of the voters in that election.

The over turning of the voter approved law was done by the Florida legislature and sealing autoposy photos, is viewed as many as a violation of the Constitution of the United States, grounds on which the Florida Alligator and Orlando Sentinel are making the appeal.

It is doubtful either media will attempt to publish these photos, but are using the law, as they see it, to keep all state laws within the framework of the United States Constitution.

The thought shared by many is not how we would like it if a loved ones autopsy photos were made public any more than whether moral right or wrong is the issue. The question wheter it is legally right or wrong.
And it will be up to the United States Supreme Court to make that decision. As it should be in this situation.
 
As much as the emotional appeal of not having the photos of Dale (or anyone's loved one) scattered about the world is compelling, the closing of records suchas these is equally dangerous.

If memory serves, the original push for "sunshine" laws was to prevent, or at lest minimize, political or financial pressures and interests from influencing the information released to the public.

While one might not wish to see their loved one on the net or elsewhere under these circumstances, there is a strong and compelling emotional appeal to made the other way as well.

Imagine your loved one suffers an untimely demise in circumstances involving a politically or financially well place individual. The results of the autopsy should (and might0 show culpability on that person's part, but through influence certain facts are witheld or altered. How adamant would you be to see the "truth" made known? Or would it best to simply suffer in silence and darkness?

As in most situations of this nature, freedom is a double edged sword..................you have to weigh which is more valuable and germaine to justice and freedom. The personal violation of having the records released or the moral violation of having corrupt individuals go unpunished because they have the power to suppress those records...............

And if you don't believe that such records have been suppressed or altered for no better reason than influence................Have I got a deal for you...
 
Well if I remember correctly you can go to the courts and with good reason be allowed to review autopsy photos with supervision and I think that was done in the Earnhardt case.(I think I am right) But my question is this, what do these papers stand to gain with access to these photos other than making money off of them by putting them on the internet? They have had to have spent tons of cash going through all these legal processes only to keep loosing and trying it again in just a few months. So my personal opinion is that they are only trying to benefit themselves and not trying to uncover some illegal goings on with the autopsy report. I also don't think they have the money to go up against DEI's lawyers, they will keep it tied up in court forever so it seems as they are spinning their wheels anyway.

Thats just my opinion and we all know what that is worth ;)
 
i don't have a problem with the autopsy REPORT being part of public record, i stongly disagree with photos being part of that, like bow said if there are legal or criminal reasons for some one to view the photos go to court and get a court order but again i see NO reason a school newspaper needs to view these photos
 
I dont know why the Newspaper wants to ask for "the truth". I think this is just a case of a bunch of college journalists with freckles, retainers and glasses just trying to win themselves a journalism award and will spend time and money to do it. It surprises me that theyre trying to get Dale's photos so badly, they havent even laid a finger on Blaise Alexander's or Eric Martin's (killed in ARCA crash in 2002).

The way courts decide things are based on moral, social and political values. It would be morally and socially just to protect the Earnhardt Family's right to privacy and keep the autopsy photos private which is why the autopsy photos in my opinion will remain private and rightfully so, no one wants to see their family member's photos given to an unreliable source.

The case that the Florida Alligator is trying to get across to the Supreme Court serves NONE of these values, meaning that the Florida Alligator in my opinion has no case but then hell, the Supreme Court has made plenty of boneheaded decisions before.

I'm pretty sure that you guys know that if they are given (which I highly doubt will happen) to this school newspaper, there will be so many leaks that the autopsy photos will be all over the internet faster than they update Jayski.com.

I did some spying of my own and I guess I found a picture of one of the Florida Alligator journalism staff members.
 

Attachments

  • alligatorstaffmember.jpg
    alligatorstaffmember.jpg
    52.4 KB · Views: 10
Freedom is indeed a double edged sword. And with freedom comes the responsibillity to protect that freedom at any and all cost icluding but not limited to great personal sacrifice.

I would gladly give up a personal freedom if doing so meant a greater freedom for the whole (I do so in a small way every time I stay below the posted speed limit) and it is my understanding that when personal freedom interferes with the freedom of the whole, the general rule of law is that the freedom of whole far outwieghs the personal freedom of any one individual. (Which is why speeding is against the law).

In other words, if seeing my wife's autopsy photos on the internet or on billboards across the world would in fact protect and preserve the freedom that so many have died to give us, it would not bother me at all and in fact I would be proud that I could make such a sacrifice.

As always, your experience, opinions, and mileage may vary.
 
Originally posted by 71Fan@Sep 30 2003, 09:08 PM
In other words, if seeing my wife's autopsy photos on the internet or on billboards across the world would in fact protect and preserve the freedom that so many have died to give us, it would not bother me at all and in fact I would be proud that I could make such a sacrifice.

:huh:
 
This law would not have been changed if it were any one else but DE. If this were some homeless person no one would even have lifted a finger to keep their photos from being shown. What in society changed that so many feel so compelled to protect this 1 man when no one cared for the hundreds and thousands before him? It is not our caring for the sanctity of life. It is not our value system. One such life is equal to another, or at least it should be. This is becoming a slippery slope on which to test our constitutional freedoms...
 
Originally posted by barelypure@Oct 2 2003, 12:41 PM
This law would not have been changed if it were any one else but DE. If this were some homeless person no one would even have lifted a finger to keep their photos from being shown. What in society changed that so many feel so compelled to protect this 1 man when no one cared for the hundreds and thousands before him? It is not our caring for the sanctity of life. It is not our value system. One such life is equal to another, or at least it should be. This is becoming a slippery slope on which to test our constitutional freedoms...
While I don't like it, the answer is...............who he was and how he died. :(
 
Originally posted by barelypure@Oct 2 2003, 12:41 PM
This law would not have been changed if it were any one else but DE. If this were some homeless person no one would even have lifted a finger to keep their photos from being shown. What in society changed that so many feel so compelled to protect this 1 man when no one cared for the hundreds and thousands before him? It is not our caring for the sanctity of life. It is not our value system. One such life is equal to another, or at least it should be. This is becoming a slippery slope on which to test our constitutional freedoms...
It's actually not about this one man, it's about one woman, Theresa Earnhardt, who had the will and the money to fight this. She spent alot of money to protect the man she loved. Those student papers IMHO don't give a rats a$$ about how he died or if there was a cover-up. IMHO they are doing this for the money, if they could get their hand on those autopsy photos if would be priceless. If you have a legitimate reason for viewing those pictures you can do so. Their reason is not legit, its BS. They have been defeated in court already so they need to give it up. I don't think they have the money to battle Theresa and DEI in court. As fas as I'm concerned nobody should have to go through that so it actually helped more than just the Earnhardt family. Now, if you live in Florida and have a loved one die you don't have to worry about going to a website oneday and finding their picture there.
 
This issue affects more than people living in Florida. This has become a national issue concerning protections afforded the people of this nation by the United States Constitution. This is bigger than the State of Florida, the Earnhardt name or anyone.
As Teresa Earnhardt has the determination and finances, she also has the right to take this into a court to keep the law she fought for through the legal system, status quo. This is her right under the laws of this country.

Just as it is the same right of the "Alligator" and the "Sentinel" to appeal the "Earnhardt" law, up to the highest court in the nation.

You cannot draw a differential between what Ms. Earnhardt has done by manipulating the law into something she feels is justified and condemn the media for doing the same thing through due process of the legal system.

There are different reasons for doing what each party seeks to do, and all parties are using the same legal right available to them.

The buck stops with the decision of the United States Supreme Court. As it should be.
 
Originally posted by bowtie@Oct 2 2003, 02:09 PM

It's actually not about this one man, it's about one woman, Theresa Earnhardt, who had the will and the money to fight this. She spent alot of money to protect the man she loved. Those student papers IMHO don't give a rats a$$ about how he died or if there was a cover-up. IMHO they are doing this for the money, if they could get their hand on those autopsy photos if would be priceless. If you have a legitimate reason for viewing those pictures you can do so. Their reason is not legit, its BS. They have been defeated in court already so they need to give it up. I don't think they have the money to battle Theresa and DEI in court. As fas as I'm concerned nobody should have to go through that so it actually helped more than just the Earnhardt family. Now, if you live in Florida and have a loved one die you don't have to worry about going to a website oneday and finding their picture there.
Very well said Bowtie, couldn't agree more!
 
I see no reason for autopsy photos to be available to the general public. I would not want my family "pictures" to be seen by someone looking for a few thrills.

I don't feel that my rights are being violated by not being able to see DE's, or anyone else's, autopsy photos.

There are some things that just need to be kept private.
 
Back
Top Bottom