
Jennifer Pawluck convicted in police graffiti case - dredmorbius
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/jennifer-pawluck-convicted-in-police-graffiti-case-gets-suspended-sentence-1.3075207
======
tunesmith
Canada's free speech laws apparently aren't stellar. I guess cbc.ca should be
given 18 months probation while prohibited from using Facebook or writing
anything about the police, since they share the same image in the article.

~~~
druddha
Better lock up OP while you're at it.

~~~
dredmorbius
Don't I at least get a trial first?

------
pervycreeper
Article omits the fact that she added a caption to the photograph she shared
that could easily be construed as a threat.

Peculiar that the article whitewashes this, where that same outlet routinely
(as recently as this week) props up specious claims of harassment as a tactic
to silence their political opponents.

~~~
dredmorbius
I was wondering what the untold story was. Do you have a reference on that?

It's _quite_ peculiar that CBC would exclude such a detail.

~~~
throwaway198765
[http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/probation-
communi...](http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/probation-community-
service-for-woman-convicted-of-criminally-harassing-police-officer)

------
dredmorbius
A _National Post_ (Canadian national conservative daily paper) article offers
more context:

"‘One cop, one bullet': Quebec woman convicted not for the graffiti she
instagrammed, but the hashtag attached"

[http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/one-cop-one-
bullet-...](http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/one-cop-one-bullet-
quebec-woman-convicted-not-for-the-graffiti-she-instagrammed-but-the-hashtag-
attached)

 _While critics in Quebec have charged she was arrested merely because of “a
picture,” the case hinged largely on the notes she attached to the posted
image._

 _“On the photo there were links, or hashtags, with Ian Lafrenière’s name
written in different ways and allusions like (‘All cops are bastards’) and
(‘One cop, one bullet’) to the point where, given the context, there was
criminal harassment,” prosecutor Josie Laplante said after the conviction._

------
poikniok
Scary to see how this is just a small step away from prohibiting any criticism
of the police. I feel sorry for Canadians now, and hope that one day they can
recover their freedoms.

~~~
tptacek
This person has in fact been prohibited from criticizing the police.

~~~
oh_sigh
Is tacitly calling for a specific persons murder "criticism"?

~~~
ricree
Regardless of what you feel about the original upload, the article does in
fact claim that she is barred from criticism:

"Pawluck is also prohibited from posting anything about police or anyone
associated with the judicial system."

~~~
oh_sigh
Right, but isn't there precedent here wherein people guilty of a crime were
forbidden from communicating with, or posting about their victim on social
media? Just that in this case, the victim is the police force, and not some
random individual.

~~~
tptacek
No, I literally just meant: this person was forbidden by the government of
Canada from criticizing the police. Apparently in any direct fashion, violent
or not.

We don't even reach the question of whether the original imagery qualifies as
"criticism".

~~~
oh_sigh
Yes, and my point is that this is very similar to how, for example, convicted
harassers aren't allowed to talk about their victims on social media, even if
it isn't in a manner associated with their crime?

------
jMyles
The most fascist part, out of a bunch of fascist parts:

> Pawluck is also prohibited from posting anything about police or anyone
> associated with the judicial system.

~~~
kenrikm
My opinion of Canada just dropped a few points.

~~~
pascalmemories
Start by reducing your opinion of Quebec where this case took place. It has a
legal system inspired more by French law than by the English law used in other
provinces.

French law permits such things as prosecution of libel of dead people which
English law does not. There is really no concept like free expression in the
English law sense (and most certainly not in the US constitutional sense).

I doubt this case would have played out the same way in any other province. No
other province operates enforcement units to trap businesses using English in
order to fine them for not using French or having French words smaller than
English ones. (for a recap of that nonsense, start with
[http://world.time.com/2013/04/08/quebecs-war-on-english-
lang...](http://world.time.com/2013/04/08/quebecs-war-on-english-language-
politics-intensify-in-canadian-province/))

~~~
alricb
_I doubt this case would have played out the same way in any other province._

That's because you don't know much about Canadian law. Pawluck was found
guilty of Criminal Harassment, which is the same offence _ad mare usque ad
mare_ , ou _d 'une mare à l'autre_, as we say over here. Criminal Code,
section 264.

~~~
ghshephard
Google translate converts, "ad mare usque ad mare, ou d'une mare à l'autre,"
to "usque ad ad mare mare or a mare to another"

I'm wondering if someone could help us out a bit.

~~~
sp332
The first phrase is Latin. "From sea to sea."
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Mari_Usque_Ad_Mare](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Mari_Usque_Ad_Mare)
The second is a (funny?) half-Latin half-French way of saying "From one sea to
the other".

~~~
alricb
Explanation:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinoceros_Party_of_Canada_(196...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinoceros_Party_of_Canada_\(1963%E2%80%9393\))

------
PhasmaFelis
One of the comments says

> _she wasnt convicted because she posted the picture. she was convincted
> because she posted the picture, with hash tags like "one bullet one cop" and
> all cops are bastards"._

If true, it sounds a bit more plausible to call it criminal harassment. I
haven't followed up, though.

~~~
spacemanmatt
Those aren't even specific threats. I'm not yet convinced this is less than
state overreach.

~~~
Pinatubo
Apparently the graffiti was a portrait of a particular police officer.

------
tantalor
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_Canada](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_Canada)

~~~
prawn
I thought this link was going to be a 404 as a social comment.

------
userbinator
_Jennifer Pawluck, 22, was found guilty in April of criminal harassment for
snapping a photo of the street art and uploading it to Instagram in 2013._

Looking at the title I was expecting her to be the graffiti artist, but the
fact that she isn't is what I find most shocking.

~~~
throwaway198765
Not sure why you find it shocking. The only shocking thing here is that the
CBC article is misleading in that it doesn't explain that she adding hashtags
saying “one cop, one bullet” and “All Cops Are Bastards”

------
danschumann
They can't stop her from posting on social media for a year.. that's baloney.

~~~
fleitz
No they can't but if she does her sentence won't be suspended anymore.

------
oh_sigh
How did she tag the police officers name in her instagram post if she didn't
know who he was?

------
vortico
Don't they understand the [Streisand
effect]([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect))?

~~~
throwaway198765
I don't see how the Streisand effect would apply here. Posting a photo of the
graffiti and adding the captions “one cop, one bullet” and “All Cops Are
Bastards” is pretty clearly harassment.

------
chroma
In 2006, Christopher Hitchens participated in a debate at the University of
Toronto. The topic: Does freedom of speech include the freedom to hate? The
entire debate isn't available on YouTube, but the segment with Hitchens is.[1]

Hitchens makes three excellent points in defense of free speech, including
hate speech. The bits I've transcribed are in italics.

First, freedom of speech is really more about freedom of hearing:

 _...it’s not just the right of the person who speaks to be heard. It is the
right of everyone in the audience to listen, and to hear. And every time you
silence someone you make yourself a prisoner of your own action, because you
deny yourself the right to hear something. In other words: Your own right to
hear and be exposed is as much involved in all these cases as is the right of
the other to voice his or her view._

Second, if you restrict speech then you must designate a censor. Is there any
person or group you are willing to trust with the power to determine what you
can read or hear?

 _Who 's going to decide? To whom do you award the right to decide which
speech is harmful or who is the harmful speaker, or to determine in advance
what are the harmful consequences going to be, that we know enough about in
advance to prevent? To whom would you give this job? To whom are you going to
award the task of being the censor?_

 _Did you hear any speaker in opposition to this motion (eloquent as... one of
them was) to whom you would delegate the task of deciding for you, what you
could read? To whom you 'd give the job of deciding for you, relieve you of
the responsibility of hearing what you might have to hear? Do you know anyone-
hands up- to whom you would give this job? Does anyone have a nominee? You
mean there's no one in Canada good enough to decide what I can read? Or hear?
I had no idea... but there’s a law that says there must be such a person. Or
there's a subsection of some piddling law that says it. Well to hell with that
law then. It's inviting you to be liars and hypocrites and to deny what you
evidently already know already._

And finally, if you censor hate speech, you must censor many religious texts:

 _Look anywhere you like for the warrant for slavery, for the subjugation of
women as chattel, for the burning and flogging of homosexuals, for ethnic
cleansing, for antisemitism, for all this you look no further than a famous
book that 's on every pulpit in this city and in every synagogue and in every
mosque. And then just see whether you can square the fact that the force that
is the main source of hatred is also the main caller for censorship. And when
you've realized this you'll therefore this evening be faced with a gigantic
false antithesis. I hope that still won't stop you from giving the motion
before you the resounding endorsement that it deserves. Thanks awfully. Night-
night. Stay cool!_

If you're interested in that sort of thing, I highly recommend watching the
whole speech. It's quite possibly the best oration by Christopher Hitchens.

1\.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyoOfRog1EM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyoOfRog1EM)
Unfortunately, the whole debate is only viewable with a flash player at
[http://tvo.org/video/188405/christopher-hitchens-freedom-
spe...](http://tvo.org/video/188405/christopher-hitchens-freedom-speech)

Note: I transcribed this about 6 months ago, but it seemed relevant enough for
me to mention it again.

~~~
chrismcb
Of course freedom of speech includes the freedom to hate, otherwise it isn't
exactly free speech.

------
codezero
Does anyone have a link to the image she posted?

Edit: found it I think.
[https://postmediamontrealgazette2.files.wordpress.com/2015/0...](https://postmediamontrealgazette2.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/0422-city-
graffiti.jpg)

~~~
ggreer
Vice's article shows it: [http://www.vice.com/read/why-did-a-student-in-
montreal-get-a...](http://www.vice.com/read/why-did-a-student-in-montreal-get-
arrested-for-an-instagram-post)

------
jqm
Maybe a more just response would be for the police to post a cartoon picture
of Jennifer Pawluck in jail.

Eye for an eye and all...

------
d_luaz
I wonder what will happened if 100,000 people shared the photos?

------
Grue3
It seems the word "harassment" completely lost its meaning these days.

~~~
throwaway198765
Nope. Just good reporting. See my other comments here.

------
formulaT
In case you thought the United States lacks this kind of prosecution, an
American student was charged with "one count of conspiring to violate civil
rights and another count of using a threat of force to intimidate African
American students due to their race."[0] after allegedly putting a noose
around the statue of a famous Black civil rights figure at the University of
Mississippi.

[0] [http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-
nation/wp/2015/03/27...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-
nation/wp/2015/03/27/civil-rights-charges-filed-against-ole-miss-student-
accused-of-putting-noose-on-james-meredith-statue/)

