What is the difference between a man well known for threatening people through his blogs in order to harass them and Freedom of Speech? Well in this case the man Evan Jensen tries to use our second Amendment to cover and protect his actions despite his malicious attempt into harassing and threatening others. His stories/blogs have been proved over and over again to be filled with lies in order to deceive the public while harassing the person he write about all while calling his blog a newspaper and himself a newspaper reported. There is no proof that either are legally viable to protect him in any way. His “newspaper ” is not registered and licensed with the state of Oregon, and it isn’t even copyright protected. It is clear Jensen has no legal or business sense and lives on self titles as a way to try and benefit by deceit.
Although his blogs are plagiarized another reported I know gave me a way to check his stories and if they are plagiarized. Again the story of his below is.
Mind you Jensen wrote this story after being caught in lies regard filing a false police report against Hamilton and the proof came out to the deceit and lies he placed in his blog in order to harass Hamilton. But this blogger of this blog took it a step foward to expose Jensen yet again for this malice deceit to harass others, to lie to police etc.
You Must Prove What You Say
The U.S. Constitution doesn’t protect your right to freedom of speech if you tell lies about someone. Slander occurs when you say untrue things to others. Libel, by comparison, occurs when you make untrue statements in print or by broadcast. Slander and libel are not protected by the First Amendment. jensen is aware of this yet ignores and makes up his own rules. In Jensens case the person you lied about can sue you in state civil court. However, your accuser usually must prove that you acted out of malice (in a deliberate attempt to cause harm) and it is apparent with so many coming forward in regards to Jensen being malice in his blogs that are used for harassment by Jensen that all involved have a great case against Jensen. As in fact Jensen has caused harm, and that he has no proof that his statements are true.
You Can’t Hurt People or Incite Trouble
In 1942, the U.S. Supreme Court added “incitement” to the list of things not covered by freedom of speech. “Fighting words” are against the law and not protected. You can’t abuse someone verbally, or use words to rile a crowd into doing something illegal. Law enforcement can criminally charge you for your conduct, and you wouldn’t be able to claim that you were exercising your constitutional rights.in Jensen’s case this is happening as we speak.
Activist and real journalist who work hard on telling the difference and creating info on the differences to determine Freedom of Speech and harassment state the following:
*Words that convey ideas are one thing; words that are used as assault weapons quite another.
*”Repeatedly bombarding a fellow person with otherwise protected speech, even if it ostensibly conveys an idea, can also constitute harassment of others when directed specifically at them in a malice way to cause harm.
Lets take a look at a variety of definitions of “harassment.” You will find the difference between free speech and harassment is this: An individual is free to state their opinion on any subject as long as that statement does not purposefully or knowingly cause another person to feel personally “frightened, threatened, oppressed, persecuted, or intimidated.” In other words, it can’t be confrontational. Jensen in each of his blogs is confrontational.he personally attacks individuals to cause them to feel threatened, persecuted or intimidated because his blogs are fill with deciet and lies to harass.
But if you’re going to direct destructive and hurtful words to someone online, know that, as in the real world, you might be called out, rebuffed, and held accountable as Jensen currently is. And that’s only fair.
People who speak out against or moderate hate speech online aren’t doing so for the sake of censoring dissenting opinions or acting contrary to the First Amendment.
They’re just refusing to tolerate attacks on their own rights and humanity.
And while it’s possible to play the part of a gray faced anon, troll, or sock puppet online, the people on the receiving ends of those words remain human.
So when people stand up to online harassment—which can include legal action—there’s sometimes a reaction—even from people who would never “troll” themselves—of, “Well, trolls are going to troll. Get off the internet if you can’t handle it.”
Here’s the problem with being that dismissive of online harassment—there are no trolls on the internet.
With the exception of spam bots and pets with Twitter accounts, the internet is entirely populated by human beings who are accountable for their words, are capable of using those words to hurt others, and still exist in the real world where telling another person to go kill themselves doesn’t fly in polite conversation.
The internet isn’t some disembodied place where people like Jensen should feel okay with delivering abuse, lies, threatsas a form of harassment without consequences or taking abuse without standing up for themselves. It’s just as real as any other part of our lives, and there are certain things you just can’t say.
The First Amendment, often invoked in defense of harassment online and otherwise,as Jensen and his love struck follower Jesse Roth claim doesn’t give people like Jensen and Roth free rein to say whatever they want to other people in all situations. There’s a difference between censorship and consequences for one’s words. And both are getting prepared to meet theirs for their actions.
And humans react, disagree, get hurt, call each other out, hold each other responsible for the things they say—online and offline.
There are those who defend free speech like Jensen under any circumstances, and to them I say this: The right to free speech is intended to guarantee people the ability to share their opinions with anyone who chooses to pay attention, not to allow them to harass people into submission. Use some common sense.