Gun forum posts used against you?

[Father Knows Best]

If a civil case gets to trial and the judge isn't sleeping, no the plaintiff attorney is not going to be allowed to parade your irrelevant, unfairly prejudicial forum posts in front of the jury.

Cosmoline, I have to disagree with you. Are you an attorney? I am. I do civil trial work. It's been 90% of my career for the last 12 years. I'm licensed in three states (Michigan, Arizona and Tennessee) and have handled cases in state and federal courts around the country.

The Defendant's statements are almost always going to be admissible if they are potentially relevant to the issues. There is a huge exception to the hearsay rule for "admissions against interest." In a case where someone is being sued for wrongful death over the shooting of another person, the defendant's statements on the use of lethal force are almost certainly going to be deemed to be relevant as the defendant's mental state at the time of (and leading up to) the shooting will be at issue.

The bottom line is that you should never write anything that you wouldn't want to have to explain to a jury.

 

[MillCreek]

I work on the defense side of medical malpractice lawsuits. During pre-trial discovery such as interrogatories and depositions, I have our defense counsel routinely ask about Usenet posts, forum posts, bulletin board posts, blogs and other sorts of Internet posts. I ask them under oath to provide their screen names or any other identifier connected with their posting activity. With this information in hand, I have done Google and other searches that has provided information helpful to the defense of these civil claims. Admissibility of these posts as evidence would of course depend upon if they are germane to the civil dispute at issue.

I was one of the first people to start doing this up here in our little legal community, and now more and more people are doing this. Sad to say, I have also had situations in which the plaintiff has lied under oath during their depositions on these matters, and this has most definitely come back to haunt them.

So I second the comments that unless you want to run the risk of your postings to be printed out, enlarged and put on the 4' x 6' foamboard for the jury to look at during trial, think of how they may come across.

PS: And although I am not an expert on other types of non-personal injury civil actions, from my perspective, I disagree with Cosmoline's opinion that most civil cases are won or lost long before trial. In medmal, we still try a lot of cases.

 

[SilentStalker]

But I don't need to log on as SilentStalker to read your posts. I'm logged on as Hawkmoon and reading what you wrote.

The issue of using as evidence in court, I suppose (remember, I really am not a lawyer) would be to prove that whoever rightfully registered the user name SilentStalker is the same person who wrote all those posts I dredged up about blowng away bad guys for entertainment on Saturday nights.

Great you just implicated me on something that I never spoke of LOL. I just joined here and have posted no nonsense like you state above LOL. However, the way you worded your post makes it sound like I have been here for a long time and have discussed shooting bad guys for Sat. night entertainment, even though it is not true. If a lawyer came on here and dug around and found that post then he would not have to search any further because even though these posts you speak of are fake, nonexistent, whatever, it makes enough implications to stand up on its on.

Also, as far as someone logging on LOL under my name and reading stuff I was referring more towards my PM's and such, not what is on an open forum. Pretty much anything that you put on the internet becomes public information that anyone can read at anytime, legally. When on the internet I would recommend doing as others have indicated, only say things that you would say in the general public, otherwise it could be held against you somehow at a later date.

Last thing, those that talk about IP addresses and tracking using those addresses, depending on your internet service provider your IP address could change everytime you log onto the net making it very hard to track using this info. alone. Later.

 

[Molon Labe]

I refuse to live in fear of assault lawyers.

Indeed, it's they who should live in fear of us. We could easily, for example, force our elected misrepresentatives to enact serious tort reform, simply by letting them know they'll be voted out of office en masse if they fail to do the job right.

+1

I refuse to live in fear. I shoot guns, I train with the militia, and say whatever the hell I want. I don't live under the radar; I couldn’t give a rat's a$$ if anyone knows, including the evil gubberment. Heck, I even told my boss I train with the militia. He just looked at me funny.

If you live in fear, you have lost the battle.

 

[Shalako]

Good thing everything I ever posted on the 'net was pure fiction.

You all are assuming everything on the 'net is written as non-fiction. Maybe its just a creative writting excercise.

For all I know all you guys are just a 'personna' anyway, except for the guys trying to make money (sales) or references off their posts. Then again, sm is just too cool to be fake.

 

[ALHunter]

Oh heck yeah it's coming back to haunt you

As a civil litigator, I can tell you your posts here will most certainly be discovered. Whether they are used against you will depend on what you have said. They could turn out to help you. Or you could have some that hurt and some that help.

In a civil suit you will be served with Interrogatories, Requests for Production, and probably Requests for Admissions. All must be answered truthfully and sworn to as truthful. These written requests are called discovery. Any good lawyer will ask questions about computer use, prior statements, where made, when made, etc.

You will also be deposed. You will be under oath subject to penalty of perjury. Any good lawyer will ask about oral or written statements on gun use, self defense, etc. The info about posting on THR will come out one way or the other.

Last, you and/or your attorney may be sent (by a savvy plaitniff's lawyer) a letter of preservation instructing you to immediatley save and preserve any computer files, disks, hard drives, etc. Basically, all computer info - both home computer and work computer (can include PDA's, Blackberry's, Voice Mail, etc.) are subject to inspection.

In sex harrassment cases I often do this. Then I send the hard drive to a computer forensic expert. What I love is the forensic expert who data mines out all the nasty emails, porno pictures, porno videos, and many times the self-made porno videos that the plaintiff herself sent to the person she alleges was sexually harassing her. This really quickly deflates her allegations and helps settle the case quickly.

Federal and State rules of evidence will all let computer records into evidence, subject only to a relevancy balancing test. And, believe me, if you've been involved in a self defense shooting or other gun altercation, your postings here and on any other internet forum will be deemed relevant, even by conservative judges.

Sorry for the long post, just wanted to clear up the issues since I have years of personal experience in this.

 

[ka50]

Two other posts about gun training and the courts, and having a CCW lawyer on retainer got me to thinking. If this has been covered recently, I didn't see it in a basic search of the topic, so I'll post the topic.

Let's say that you are involved in a defensive confrontation that involves you pulling and firing your gun. For the sake of argument, let's say that the attacker had broken into your home and cornered you and you shot them dead.

You are found to be justified by the criminal courts, BUT the dead person's family files a civil suit and it is learned that you belong to a gun forum and the opposing civil lawyer learns your user name and logs on to the gun forum and does a search of your posts. Now that lawyer has a record of your posts. It could show your mind-set about lethal gun use that could hurt you before a civil jury trail. What if your posts would make a typical jury think that you're some kind of cowboy that discusses the best ammo for a one-shot kill or why you favor the lethality of a shotgun over a handgun?

Could your forum posts come back to haunt you in a court of law?

cuz I wanna be a cooowboy baaaby!

 

[ccw007]

I started a thread on something like this not long ago. I seen on the news last month there have been 2 criminal cases that information the person posted online resulted in charges.

 

[ka50]

+1

I refuse to live in fear. I shoot guns, I train with the militia, and say whatever the hell I want. I don't live under the radar; I couldn’t give a rat's a$$ if anyone knows, including the evil gubberment. Heck, I even told my boss I train with the militia. He just looked at me funny.

If you live in fear, you have lost the battle.

"Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself"

 

[Old Dog]

I would think that ... if one had previously made internet forum posts saying things such as ...

"There's someone I don't know comin' inside my house, I ain't waitin' to see if he's bigger'n me or carryin' a knife or a gun or a chainsaw ... I'm shootin' to slide-lock ..."

Yeah, that could -- and would -- be used against you.

This is why, from time time, I think many of us read a post and just kinda shake our head or chuckle ruefully ... sometimes I note some signature lines that seem a little extreme too -- along the lines of, "Nothing says 'Freeze, dirtbag,' like the sound of a 12-gauge being racked," etc... Anything that could go toward painting one in court as a trigger-happy whackjob just waiting for that one opportunity to blow someone away ...

Why wouldn't anyone presume that any half-decent lawyer in a civil case wouldn't drag out every scrap of information on a defendant in a civil suit, including everything the defendant typed from his computer keyboard?

If you live in fear, you have lost the battle.

Gee, great sound bite ... I know everyone here considers themselves to be rugged libertarian individualists, but I don't think the question is at all about living in fear; it's more a question of exercising common sense and being prudent in one's public statements ...