Stolen Valor Act Unconstitutional

[JOVE23]

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/07/a ... ty_071610/

Judge rules Stolen Valor Act unconstitutional



By Dan Elliott - The Associated Press



DENVER — A law that makes it illegal to lie about being a war hero is unconstitutional because it violates free speech, a federal judge ruled Friday as he dismissed a case against a Colorado man who claimed he received two military medals.



Rick Glen Strandlof claimed he was an ex-Marine who was wounded in Iraq and received the Purple Heart and Silver Star, but the military had no record he ever served. He was charged with violating the Stolen Valor Act, which makes it a crime punishable by up to a year in jail to falsely claim to have won a military medal.



U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn dismissed the case and said the law is unconstitutional, ruling the government did not show it has a compelling reason to restrict that type of statement.



A spokesman for the U.S. attorney in Denver said prosecutors are reviewing the decision and haven’t decided whether to appeal. The spokesman said that decision would be made by the U.S. Justice Department in Washington and prosecutors in Denver.



Strandlof’s lawyer didn’t immediately return a call.



The law has also been challenged in California and a case now before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.



Denver attorney Christopher P. Beall, who filed a friend-of-the-court brief for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, said the Stolen Valor Act is fatally flawed because it doesn’t require prosecutors to show anyone was harmed or defamed by the lie.



“The government position was that any speech that’s false is not protected by the First Amendment. That proposition is very dangerous,” Beall said.



“It puts the government in a much more powerful position to prosecute people for speaking out on things they believe to be true but turn out not to be true,” he said.



Beall said the ACLU was not defending the actions Strandlof is accused of, but took issue with the principle behind the law.



AMVETS leaders on Monday said they disagreed with the decision, and they called for an appeal.



“The veterans’ community has demonstrated time and again the actual harm Stolen Valor does to our nation’s veterans and the way these false claims can impact public perception of our nation’s heroes,” AMVETS National Commander Duane J. Miskulin said.

Thoughts?



I can see both sides; I don't like infringing on First Amendment rights very much, and if this guy just pretends to be a war hero to get his kicks and doesn't benefit from it , have fun with that.



BUT



Who lies about being a war hero for any other reason than to benefit? That's not free speech, it's fraud. Plus, it takes away from those who actually did serve honorably.



Discuss.

 

[bri]

I think it is sad and pathetic, but not surprised. We live in a selfish society where most people think it's all about them. Ethics and integrity barely exist anymore. People think it is acceptable to do whatever they want in order to get what they want.

 

[sth]

The people who do this are creeps. They are looking to sucker people. But on the other hand people have freedom of expression. And they can say whatever dumbass stuff they want as long as it does no harm. Illinois Nazis can make really vile speeches but as long as they aren't a threat to create violence. And these creeps are trying to sucker free drinks and other favors. But they aren't causing harm. So this law is wrong but those guys should get tossed out on asses if they get busted at a night club trying to get free drinks.

 

[MassHavoc]

This has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen. Why don't we just call death/bomb threats freedom of speech while we are at it. It's a fucking law for a reason, and they broke it. Plain and simple.

 

[jakobeast]

I agree with the court. If no one was hurt because of it, then it shouldn't matter. If the dude is getting attention and it give him a stiffy, good on him. It is speech, and I believe in the freedom to say what I want where I want, no matter how unpopular.



However......



The minute it is found out he ain't a war hero, it should be legal to beat the shit out of him. No weapons, just fists and such. It is a shitty thing to do to veterans, no doubt, and and as such a vet should sock this guy right in the face.



I feel the same about burning the flag. The statement made by doing so conveys the message with authority. If that person feels it is that important, then go ahead. Again though, be warned, you loose your right to not be hit.

 

[bubbleheadchief]

If the guy they mention in the story is who I think he is, he's a piece of shit. He went to several Vet functions, and was a special guest speaker for various local civil groups where he was living at. So yeah, he did benefit in a way from it.



I guess I am a bit, okay alot, biased about it, as I am still active duty, and a couple of my friends arent coming home.

 

[bubbleheadchief]

[quote name="jakobeast"]I agree with the court. If no one was hurt because of it, then it shouldn't matter. If the dude is getting attention and it give him a stiffy, good on him. It is speech, and I believe in the freedom to say what I want where I want, no matter how unpopular.



However......



The minute it is found out he ain't a war hero, it should be legal to beat the shit out of him. No weapons, just fists and such. It is a shitty thing to do to veterans, no doubt, and and as such a vet should sock this guy right in the face.



I feel the same about burning the flag. The statement made by doing so conveys the message with authority. If that person feels it is that important, then go ahead. Again though, be warned, you loose your right to not be hit.[/quote]

The problem is Jako, if this is the guy I am thinking of, this POS showed up in uniform, a uniform he is not entitled to wear, with a Medal for Valor pinned to his chest. It's one thing to make a statement that is false, it's another thing all together to actually parade around in uniform.

 

[jakobeast]

[quote name="bubbleheadchief"]The problem is Jako, if this is the guy I am thinking of, this POS showed up in uniform, a uniform he is not entitled to wear, with a Medal for Valor pinned to his chest. It's one thing to make a statement that is false, it's another thing all together to actually parade around in uniform.

[/quote]





And as such he should have the shit kicked out of him.

 

[bubbleheadchief]

I had to edit it a little Jako, I am not sure if he is the guy I am thinking of, or not.

 

[jakobeast]

[quote name="bubbleheadchief"]I had to edit it a little Jako, I am not sure if he is the guy I am thinking of, or not.[/quote]



I did an edit on my post as well to reflect. I remember that story too, and I think it is the same guy. Even if, as earlier referenced, this dude did it to get free drinks, that constitutes fraud in my book. Granted, it isn't on a grand scale, but I would feel taken advantage of, and I would find an actual vet (perhaps fly you in bubble) to kick the shit out of him.



Honestly, a few drinks isn't worth a jail term, but it does warrant an ass kicking.

 

[winos5]

This is not an isolated incident.



People lie about serving in the military, the extent of their service, ect... on a regular basis, particularly on resumes. Verifying military service records for the average employer is rarely done.



Hell, wasn't that long ago that a very high ranking military officer was caught wearing medals of the highest order that he was never awarded. I believe he ended up committing suicide over it. Can't recall his name or what service it was.



IMO most of the cases in the media are guilty of fraud or theft by fraud at the very least. Igf they can't be charged with violating the stolen valor act then start charging/prosecuting them for fraud or thecft by fraud.



On the other hand, there are alot people that are collectors of military equipment and uniforms. I don't have a problem with them playing dress up. If no harm is done and they are not defrauding anyone I don't think prosecuting them is worthwhile.



http://www.wowowow.com/pov/richard-glen-strandlof-veterans-leader-nothing-fraud-297321



http://www.denverpost.com/commented/ci_12537680



This Strandlof guy is a POS. Definately guilty of fraud.

 

[bubbleheadchief]

[quote name="winos5"]This is not an isolated incident.



People lie about serving in the military, the extent of their service, ect... on a regular basis, particularly on resumes. Verifying military service records for the average employer is rarely done.



Hell, wasn't that long ago that a very high ranking military officer was caught wearing medals of the highest order that he was never awarded. I believe he ended up committing suicide over it. Can't recall his name or what service it was.



IMO most of the cases in the media are guilty of fraud or theft by fraud at the very least. Igf they can't be charged with violating the stolen valor act then start charging/prosecuting them for fraud or thecft by fraud.



On the other hand, there are alot people that are collectors of military equipment and uniforms. I don't have a problem with them playing dress up. If no harm is done and they are not defrauding anyone I don't think prosecuting them is worthwhile.[/quote]

That was ADM Boorda, he was CNO at the time and he did commit suicide but the notes he left were never released to the public. He had risen from the ranks of the enlisted to become the CNO. The issue was whether or not he was allowed to wear a wreath for valor on a couple of medals he had earned. His former CO said he was, the guy that gave him the medals, the board who says you are or arent allowed to attach the wreaths said he wasn't. That is why people feel he commited suicide over it, as he was very much about integrity, the proverbial throwing himself on his sword.

Sad part about this guy, I was in his office two weeks prior to him commiting suicide, as he was the re-enlisting officer for a very good friend of mine.

 

[winos5]

[quote name="bubbleheadchief"]

That was ADM Boorda, he was CNO at the time and he did commit suicide but the notes he left were never released to the public. He had risen from the ranks of the enlisted to become the CNO. The issue was whether or not he was allowed to wear a wreath for valor on a couple of medals he had earned. His former CO said he was, the guy that gave him the medals, the board who says you are or arent allowed to attach the wreaths said he wasn't. That is why people feel he commited suicide over it, as he was very much about integrity, the proverbial throwing himself on his sword.

Sad part about this guy, I was in his office two weeks prior to him commiting suicide, as he was the re-enlisting officer for a very good friend of mine.[/quote]



Yes, that's who I was thinking of. Sorry to hear you lost a friend/colleague.

 

[bubbleheadchief]

Sorry, I didn't know Boorda until I met him at James' reenlistment. One of the cool things about the Military, when we re enlist we can request whoever we want to be the officer, and he had requested Boorda and he said yes.

 

[winos5]

[quote name="bubbleheadchief"]Sorry, I didn't know Boorda until I met him at James' reenlistment. One of the cool things about the Military, when we re enlist we can request whoever we want to be the officer, and he had requested Boorda and he said yes.[/quote]



That's cool. I went with my CO when I extended and re-enlisted. When I got commissioned it was the Wing Commander. Was just trying to tread lightly.

 

[bubbleheadchief]

[quote name="winos5"]



That's cool. I went with my CO when I extended and re-enlisted. When I got commissioned it was the Wing Commander. Was just trying to tread lightly.[/quote]

LOL, understand......I was too, I didnt want it to sound like Boorda was a friend..I was an RM2 at the time ....(E-5).

 

[IceHogsFan]

Denver attorney Christopher P. Beall, who filed a friend-of-the-court brief for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, said the Stolen Valor Act is fatally flawed because it doesn’t require prosecutors to show anyone was harmed or defamed by the lie.

Why does someone have to be harmed or defamed in order for it to be wrong?



I love this law and what it stands for. I am not so much bothered by someone who claims

something (a good ass kicking as Jako stated would be fine) but this law was established

to prevent others from benefiting from those who have served honorably and/ or gave their

lives. They should fight this judge's position and if need be, take it all the way to the SC.

 

[jakobeast]

[quote name="IceHogsFan"]



Why does someone have to be harmed or defamed in order for it to be wrong?



I love this law and what it stands for. I am not so much bothered by someone who claims

something (a good ass kicking as Jako stated would be fine) but this law was established

to prevent others from benefiting from those who have served honorably and/ or gave their

lives. They should fight this judge's position and if need be, take it all the way to the SC.[/quote]



I get the spirit of the law, and I do appreciate it, but I just don't see why someone should be imprisoned for years because they like to play dress up.



However, the minute they use it to profit, then by all means lock the ******* up

 

[bubbleheadchief]

Its only a year in jail

 

[jakobeast]

[quote name="bubbleheadchief"]Its only a year in jail[/quote]



See? Wouldn't it be better to beat the shit outta them?