Officer John Geolas - Ass Hole Of The Year!

[WaTcHeR]

Well it seems that the "court order" finally got around to this message board about officer John Geolas. A judge had the "host" delete all post about officer John Geolas "alleged incident" in Prairie Village, Kansas! You ask what the hell was Officer John Geolas doing in Prairie Village, Kansas, when he's from Randolph, Missouri? Well I posted several LINKS below for you to read and see what happened.

So for those who posted anything about officer John Geolas and his "alleged incident" on that post that supposedly occurred, was deleted by a judges court order.

Luckily the host of this message board only deletes the "post" in question, instead of the entire message board. At least the host of the board wasn't a complete ass and delete the entire site, as did the web host with "www.PoliceCrimes.com" when they received the court order. Sorry Admin., that your host for your site wasn't as kind.

Now officer John Geolas may want to go back and forth playing this cat and mouse game and getting a judge to "ASK" a host to remove a story or post, but that will be as far as it will probably go. The stories and post may be removed, but in the future they will be copied and put back up again, again and again. I don't see a jury convicting someone for printing the truth of actual events or personal opinions, nor do I see a judge being stupid enough to even allow a trial to even begin over this matter.

Amendment 1- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This isn't harassment or is there anything that a person would be liable for in this case. There is NO law that say's a citizen can't give his personal opinion about a public official, this goes for cops as well! In fact the court order since handed down by a judge, is now "public record" which means it is NEWS worthy! Also there is probably no "gag order," so any discussion about the court order, the judge and officer John Geolas is pretty much open season!

Now about these links, how can I say this....I was surfing through the net one day and came across these stories on officer John Geolas and I was stunned, that an officer would do something like this! Later officer John Geolas went before a jury of his peers and was found not guilty. Officer John Geolas then had a judge expunge his record. All "expunge" means is that a judge is ordering all "court house and police records" be destroyed and not be used, but that's all the power the judge has! If the judge wants the information removed from the "media" and stay off the net, then it would have to become a "Federal" case and I don't see that happening.

Here are the Links I keep mentioning. Now these are the only links on the World Wide Web. There's only "3" now, there use to be "8" more links but the court order got to those site as well and the stories have been removed.

www.kctv.com/Global/story.asp?S=3707620

www.wdaftv4.com/PrintNews.asp?id=10000

www.badcopnews.com/missouri/

[WaTcHeR]

This story has nothing to do with the "other alleged incident," that supposedly happened with Officer John Geolas. This story is of Officer John Geolas breaking the law and being found guilty in a court of law.

Officer John Geolas "Public Picture"

Prairie Village, Kansas - Officer John Geolas was cited last year for unauthorized use of lights and sirens when he got into a car accident in Prairie Village. He told police he was going to a call in Holt, Missouri where he worked as an officer.

Officer John Geolas was found guilty and fined $90 in Prairie Village for using his lights and sirens after he was involved in a collision in his unmarked vehicle.

[WaTcHeR]

Now just because a web site removes a story because of a court order, doesn't mean it completely goes away.

For example if you go to www.Google.com and do a search for "Officer John Geolas," you will see about dozen sites with stories about him. If you click on 8 out of the 12 sites the story is gone! That's ok instead of clicking on the actual story, click on instead the word " Cached" and the story is there and will be there til the end of time!

Now this works real well with web sites, just as long as another story doesn't replace the original story on that particular page. But it doesn't work all that well with "massage boards." I salvaged from Google what I could from the original post that was deleted.

<><><><><>

From the post that was deleted by court order called, "PoliceCrimes.com Shut Down By Judge"

Mar 25, 2006, 2:24pm, shuftin wrote:

This is extremely fishy. Local Judge? City judge? State Judge? Federal judge? Who has that kind of power and authority? I don’t think a lower court judge can make that ruling. I'm not sure about the laws concerning the internet. Normally when a lawsuit is filed in a State the defendant must either live in that State or have business in that State. What about the right "To face your accusers" and “Have your day in court”? Was anybody served?

-------

Administrator wrote:

I believe it's going to be a "local" judge who screwed up. The judge is probably a friend of the officer.

I don't think it was a federal judge. If it was a federal judge, that judge would have to be a Federal judge in that particular area of either my web host server or myself. A Federal judge in Kansas or Missouri would not have the jurisdiction to take one story off a site, let alone shut the site down. Also a local judge does not have jurisdiction to remove contents off a site anywhere in the U.S. or in the world, they might could temporally on a local site.

As far as his record being expunged, once a story hits the net it's fair game and not a damn thing can be done. You just can't go back in time and erase something that happened. When someone's record is expunged, that only has to do with court records being destroyed or not used in the future against that person. You can't erase records from the press.

--------

KC wrote:

www.aclunc.org/aclunews/news62000/web.html


Court Lifts Gag Order:Public Documents on the Internet Are Protected


On September 13, the Alpine County Superior Court vacated a "gag" order that required all public court documents to be taken down from a controversial website, smalltownjustice.com, put up by Karl and Judy Hoelscher. The court's action came in response to a ruling in August by the Third District Court of Appeal agreeing to review the constitutionality of the gag order unless it was vacated by the Superior Court. The ACLU-NC filed an amicus brief in the appellate court in support of the Hoelschers' bid to have the gag order lifted.

"We are extremely pleased that the court has vacated its order," said ACLU-NC staff attorney Ann Brick. "All of the documents affected by the order were available to anyone who asked to see them at the courthouse. The website simply opened the courthouse door to the rest of the world."

The dispute over the website began shortly after Karl Hoelscher put the site up in 1997, after his wife, Judy Komaroni Hoelscher, was sentenced to four months in jail as the result of a car chase with police. Their website was highly critical of both the CHP officer Gregory Mason who conducted the arrest and the manner in which the judicial system dealt with her case.

When Mason and his wife sued the Hoelschers for libel and invasion of privacy, the Hoelschers began posting documents filed in the case on their website. At the Masons' urging, the Alpine Superior Court issued a "gag" order on April 28 ordering the Hoelschers to remove all the of the court filings in the case from the website. The Hoelschers then asked the Court of Appeal to overturn the order.

"The court order reaffirms that individuals who publish websites are entitled to the same full First Amendment protections for their Internet speech as the traditional media receive for their publications," said Roger Myers, a partner with Steinhart & Falconer, who with associate Rachel Boehm prepared the ACLU amicus brief in support of the Hoelschers. "One of the wonders of the Internet is that it gives every individual with a computer the ability to be heard on issues fundamental to democracy, such as how the courts and the police are handling a given case."

"The gag order would have dramatically limited Internet speech on these issues," added Myers, "by allowing courts to prevent websites from publishing court documents critical of law enforcement or the judicial system, which is one reason it was so important to have the order vacated."

---------

Administrator wrote:

I'll be damn! I forgot all about SmallTownJustice.com. SmallTownJustice.com was probably the first inspiration for me to start PoliceCrimes.com. Another inspiration was JusticeFiles.com.

JisticeFiles.com was shut down by the government because they were posting perfectly legal "court" documents over the net. The site owner was posting police officers names, address, social security numbers, telephone numbers. All this information is perfectly legal to obtain at a court house in any county and there is no law that says what you can or can't do with the information.

Now just because the government shut JusticeFiles.com down, doesn't mean that the information on the police officers isn't still available to the public on the net. If you would like to see names, addresses and social security numbers on police officers in Washington State you can go to this "mirror site."

Link-
osiris.978.org/~brianr/mirrors/www.justicefiles.org/Kirkland/Kirkland%20SSN.asp

The Home page is-
osiris.978.org/~brianr/mirrors/www.justicefiles.org/

Now there is a big difference between SmallTownJustice.com, JusticeFiles.com and PoliceCrimes.com! PoliceCrimes.com only posted actual news articles of police officers that broke the law and were arrested or charged with a crime. Sort of like Officer John Geolas! None of the news stories are made up! If there wasn't thousands of crooked, dirty cops in America, this site wouldn't be up and running! Oh did I mention the crooked judges that have no regards to the constitutional rights of a citizen?

I'm starting to look into other options of what I can do to keep PoliceCrimes.com up and running. If "mirror sites" can keep sites up and running, even if there is a court order to keep it off the net, I may just make several "mirror sites" of PoliceCrimes.com.

I've already had someone request all my files and pictures be given to them so that they may make a mirror site and keep PoliceCrimes.com running. I happily obliged!

Other options I might have would be to put my site on a server "off shore or in another country." But then again the government can always "block" IP addresses to that server and allow no one to read the truth! Can you say censorship?

It's a sad day in America, when a judge or the government thinks they have a right to abuse anyone's First Amendment rights!

-------

KC wrote:

EFF Challenges Secret Court Order
Motion Demands Information About the Seizure of Indymedia's Servers


Texas - Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) attorneys have filed a motion to unseal a secret US federal court order that led to the seizure of two servers hosting several websites and radio feeds belonging to Indymedia, a global collective of Independent Media Centers (IMCs) and thousands of journalists. The motion seeks to discover which agencies and governments are responsible for the seizure in order to hold them accountable. In their motion, EFF attorneys argue that "the public and the press have a clear and compelling interest in discovering under what authority the government was able unilaterally to prevent Internet publishers from exercising their First Amendment rights." They argue further that secret court orders circumvent due process, undermine confidence in the judicial system, and deny an avenue for redress.

"When a secret order results in the unconstitutional silencing of media, the public has a right to know what happened," said Kurt Opsahl, EFF Staff Attorney. "Freedom of the press is an essential part of the First Amendment, and our government must show it had a compelling state interest to order such an extreme intrusion to the rights of the publisher and the public."

Citing a gag order, Rackspace has not revealed the contents of the seizure order, the requesting agency, or even confirmed the identity of the court that issued it. Apparently requested by an unidentified foreign government, the secret order was served to San Antonio-based Rackspace Managed Hosting, which hosts IndyMedia's servers. The seizure took offline more than 20 IMC websites and more than 10 streaming radio feeds. So far, government agencies in the US, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Departments of State and Justice, and the US Attorney's Office in San Antonio, have refused to take responsibility for the incident. Prosecutors in Switzerland and Italy have admitted pursuing investigations related to Indymedia articles but denied requesting the seizure.

"Silencing Indymedia with a secret order is no different than censoring any other news website, whether it's USA Today or your local paper," said Kevin Bankston, EFF attorney and Equal Justice Works/Bruce J. Ennis Fellow. "If the government is allowed to ignore the Constitution in this case, then every news publisher should be wondering, 'Will I be silenced next?'"

EFF's motion to unseal was filed in the federal court in the Western District of Texas, where EFF believes the secret court order originated.

Contacts:

Kevin Bankston
Attorney, Equal Justice Works / Bruce J. Ennis Fellow
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[e-mail]

Kurt Opsahl
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[e-mail]

----------

That's it all there is left on that post off of Google.

[Administrator]

watcher said:

Well it seems that the "court order" finally got around to this message board about officer John Geolas. A judge had the "host" delete all post about officer John Geolas "alleged incident"

I knew this was coming, just a matter of time. I also knew that the policy for the message board stated they would only delete the post in question and not the entire board. I was kind of surprised the post was deleted, because I had gone back and "edited" the entire post to be sure there was no mention of the other "alleged" incident other calling it the other "alleged" incident.

watcher said:

Now just because a web site removes a story because of a court order, doesn't mean it completely goes away. For example if you go to www.Google.com and do a search for "Officer John Geolas," you will see about dozen sites with stories about him. If you click on 8 out of the 12 sites the story is gone! That's ok instead of clicking on the actual story, click on instead the word " Cached" and the story is there and will be there til the end of time!

This is true. If you look on a search engine I will soon have two different pages listed of the states of Missouri and Kansas. The original pages will forever be cached into Google of what really happened, compliments of officer John Geolas.

To date I've only had two police officers contact me asking that stories on the site be removed. Officer Geolas never contacted me. I would have told officer Geolas the same thing as told the other two officers. One officer wrote to me that their record was expunged. I made a note under the officers story and indicated they were found not guilty. The second officer demanded that I remove his story, because it would hurt his "reputation." I told him I would not because he was found guilty! "He has a little business on the side, with his name as a title I believe."

As far as Officer Geolas I would have gave him the same courtesy and printed a story, under the original story that he was found NOT GUILTY in a court of law. The same is given to every citizen in this country, by the media. As far as erasing the past as officer Geolas is trying, it's not going to happen!

This could have been avoided with a simple request from officer Geolas that we update his story, now I guess Officer John Geolas is going to be a popular officer on here or as some say maybe even the "Ass Hole COP of the Year?"

[Administrator]

I forgot to mention that in a way, a special thanks does go to officer John Geolas. When he had a judge shut down the site, I went ahead and re-did the site. I think it looks a lot better and will be a lot easier to maintain than the old version. As of today I've got about 98% of the site back online.

For those who haven't seen the new version of the site can go check it out here:

www.policecrimes.com/