>The flyer, according to the lawyer, named a police officer who lives in the area where the activists were arrested and alleged he was connected to the killing in January of forest defender Manuel “Tortuguita” Terán during a multi-agency raid on the Atlanta Forest protest encampment.
>[...] According to public records, one of the officers named lives in the area where the activists posted flyers. [...]
Sounds like they weren't just trying to raise awareness about the killing, they're trying to out the specific officers involved, in the very neighborhood that the officer lived. In other words, they're basically trying to dox them. IANAL but that plausible could be considered "intimidation".
Sure, sure. Next it'll be "intimidation" to take a picture of an officer's badge -- which they already routinely obscure. There's nothing police hate more than accountability. Pick up that can.
> [...] the city of Los Angeles has sued a local journalist and an activist group over the online publication of undercover LAPD officers’ pictures — images the city had itself provided.
It seems to me that posting flyers on mailboxes on the side of a street, without approaching any other people or or their property is pretty explicitly an excercise in free speech. Especially when describing public information about public officials.
Arresting those folks, putting them in solitary confinement, and holding them without bond when they were arrested for a non-violent charge and have no previous criminal record - that is more of an intimidation tactic than any fliers could be.
"Doxxing" is a meaningless word, legally. I can put anyone's name and street address up on a billboard as long as I didn't aquire it through privileged means (such as if I was a records clerk at their medical clinic).
Even the bar to winning civil libel is very high. Putting up the names of public officials who you believe committed evil acts during the course of their pubic duties is extremely well inside the bounds of the first amendment and probably one is the most protected forms of speech there is.
No bail and solitary confinement as extralegal punishment has been the norm for J6 protestors for over two years now, but no one on HN gives a shit. Now it's happening to people on the left, and suddenly pearls are clutched.
HN is not one person. I gave a shit when it was in Guantanamo, I gave a shit when it was with OWS protestors, I definitely gave a shit when people who peacefully occupied a building were called "insurrectionists" as though they were going to be charged with treason, and I've seen plenty of other people here give a shit in all these cases, too.
J6 protesters were treated better then average typical defendants. This are treated worst.
These exercised free speech and attempted to inform public about dangerous cops. J6 protests were violent, invaded capitol and attempted to reverse election. They were not imprisoned in their preparatory phase.
They're different, but not that much. In all 3, the cops are definitely NOT working for the citizens, they're working for the people in power and oppressing and brutalizing the citizens. The root causes are a little different, and the targeted groups are a little different, but overall it's pretty similar. In civilized countries, the cops mostly work for the citizens, to keep the peace, and don't brutalize and murder people with impunity.
I'd say one big difference is who the people in power are, that the cops are working for: in China/Russia, it's the dictator. In the US, it's really for themselves, and whatever corrupt local leaders they're friends with. In the US, law enforcement really resembles organized crime.
>[...] According to public records, one of the officers named lives in the area where the activists posted flyers. [...]
Sounds like they weren't just trying to raise awareness about the killing, they're trying to out the specific officers involved, in the very neighborhood that the officer lived. In other words, they're basically trying to dox them. IANAL but that plausible could be considered "intimidation".