College must release Loughner’s emails
Tucson assassin Jarod Loughner’s former community college has been ordered to release the 250 email communications about him while he was a student according to the Huffington Post;
Pima County Superior Court Judge Stephen Villarreal rejected the Pima Community College’s argument that the emails were part of Loughner’s official school record and protected from disclosure under a federal privacy law.
The Arizona Republic sued the college over the records, arguing that the records could help the public determine if the college took appropriate steps in dealing with Loughner after a series of run-ins with campus police.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure the college isn’t at fault here any more than the local Army recruiting unit. The college was in the same position as the Army…anything they had done to warn the community would have been construed as a violation of Loughner’s privacy rights.
If there’s any culpability, I’m pretty sure it lies with law enforcement who actually had the authority and means to get his bad behavior on the record which would have prevented him from purchasing a gun.
Category: Breaking News, Guns, Legal
Absent the college having criminal behavior to complain about, the law enforcement system cannot take action. Until and unless the behavior crosses the line into criminal activity indicating that the individual is a clear danger to himself and others, there is no legal recourse for placing him into involuntary psych evaluation. If the individual voluntarily decides they want to be evaluated, they still do not have to go through law enforcement to do so.
In plain language until laughner commits a crime AND the college desires prosecution there is no valid reason for the Sheriff to take him for psych evaluation. To date there has been no indication that laughner actually committed a criminal offense before the shooting at least as far as Pima College has said.
Law enforcement simply cannot take someone off of the street and have them evaluated just because the subject is acting a bit weird. There has to be more than that. Something overt to indicate a danger to themselves or others has to be exhibited by the subject or the LEO’s would be violating the rights of the subject.
Jonn,
Just a nitpick, but you said “to get his bad behavior on the record which would have prevented him from purchasing a gun.”
Sadly, that sort of plays into the hands of the gun-grabber’s arguments that stricter laws prevent crimes through denying a person a gun. Anyone who wants one can get one, through a dealer or otherwise.
For example, as a private citizen here in Maine, once I own a firearm, I can sell it to whoever I please and don’t need to run a background check or fill out any paperwork unless the buyer wants a written receipt. There’s a classified ads magazine up here called “Uncle Henry’s”, and every issue (it comes out weekly) has pages of firearms and related items for sale. If you want a used gun, it’s easy enough to get one if you have the cash, or often, trade items the seller is interested in.
Then there is the black market in places where the laws are draconian. Criminals have no problem obtaining a firearm. Never have, regardless of how strict the law is.
Anyway, it’s nit-picking, but I see what you were getting at.
Hey, maybe we can get Judge Villareal to release the original search warrant, and the return of service on the warrant for Cpl Guerena’s house? If e-mails are that important, perhaps he’d see how important a search warrant, and it’s return, are.