Stolen Valor Act ruled Unconstitutional

[Navy1960]

A man from Colorado who was masquerading as a hero had a lucky break with the federal judge who handled his case, according to a feature on the Navy Times.

Rick Glen Strandlof reportedly made claims that he was a former Marine who had been wounded while serving in Iraq. He said that he was the recipient of the Purple Heart and the Silver Star, but the military did not have any record that he was in the service. Because of this he was charged with violating the Stolen Valor Act, which stipulates that it was a crime to claim that one has won a military medal when it was untrue.

The case, however, was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn, who ruled the law was unconstitutional.
Stolen Valor Act Ruled as ?Unconstitutional? by Judge! | Navy SEALs Blog by USNavySEALs.com

Those that pose or make false claims do nothing but dishonor all those who have actually made the sacrifices and often times given their lives for this nation. It is is the lowest form of disrespect and for a Judge to see this act as a form of Free Speech when it is nothing short of theft is beyond me.

 

[Ravi]

A man from Colorado who was masquerading as a hero had a lucky break with the federal judge who handled his case, according to a feature on the Navy Times.

Rick Glen Strandlof reportedly made claims that he was a former Marine who had been wounded while serving in Iraq. He said that he was the recipient of the Purple Heart and the Silver Star, but the military did not have any record that he was in the service. Because of this he was charged with violating the Stolen Valor Act, which stipulates that it was a crime to claim that one has won a military medal when it was untrue.

The case, however, was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn, who ruled the law was unconstitutional.
Stolen Valor Act Ruled as ?Unconstitutional? by Judge! | Navy SEALs Blog by USNavySEALs.com

Those that pose or make false claims do nothing but dishonor all those who have actually made the sacrifices and often times given their lives for this nation. It is is the lowest form of disrespect and for a Judge to see this act as a form of Free Speech when it is nothing short of theft is beyond me.

If he didn't receive anything of value from his pretense he is a loser not a criminal so I think the judge made the right decision.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

A man from Colorado who was masquerading as a hero had a lucky break with the federal judge who handled his case, according to a feature on the Navy Times.

Rick Glen Strandlof reportedly made claims that he was a former Marine who had been wounded while serving in Iraq. He said that he was the recipient of the Purple Heart and the Silver Star, but the military did not have any record that he was in the service. Because of this he was charged with violating the Stolen Valor Act, which stipulates that it was a crime to claim that one has won a military medal when it was untrue.

The case, however, was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn, who ruled the law was unconstitutional.
Stolen Valor Act Ruled as ?Unconstitutional? by Judge! | Navy SEALs Blog by USNavySEALs.com

Those that pose or make false claims do nothing but dishonor all those who have actually made the sacrifices and often times given their lives for this nation. It is is the lowest form of disrespect and for a Judge to see this act as a form of Free Speech when it is nothing short of theft is beyond me.

If he didn't receive anything of value from his pretense he is a loser not a criminal so I think the judge made the right decision.

He doesn't need to receive anything of value for him to violate the "Stolen Valor Act" dumbass!

Powered by Google Docs

 

[Navy1960]

Great Falls - A 19-year-old Washington, D.C., man who was arrested at a Montana airport has pleaded guilty to impersonating an FBI agent and saying he had a gun in his carry-on bag to see how personnel would respond. He says he wanted to observe how security responded.
The United States Attorney’s Office announced that during a federal court session in Great Falls, Malik Hannabal Shabazz., a 19-year-old resident of Washington, D.C., pled guilty to false impersonation of an officer of the United States
Criminal Justice student pleads guilty to impersonating FBI agent

The reason I put that there is simple, there is no difference between a person that would impersonate an FBI officer and one who would wear the uniform or make false claims of valor i.e. awards they did not receive or rank they did not achieve , or battles they did not appear in. In the end they are impersonating for gain even if that gain is recognition. It still makes the dishonorable, and worthless.

 

[Ravi]

Great Falls - A 19-year-old Washington, D.C., man who was arrested at a Montana airport has pleaded guilty to impersonating an FBI agent and saying he had a gun in his carry-on bag to see how personnel would respond. He says he wanted to observe how security responded.
The United States Attorney’s Office announced that during a federal court session in Great Falls, Malik Hannabal Shabazz., a 19-year-old resident of Washington, D.C., pled guilty to false impersonation of an officer of the United States
Criminal Justice student pleads guilty to impersonating FBI agent

The reason I put that there is simple, there is no difference between a person that would impersonate an FBI officer and one who would wear the uniform or make false claims of valor i.e. awards they did not receive or rank they did not achieve , or battles they did not appear in. In the end they are impersonating for gain even if that gain is recognition. It still makes the dishonorable, and worthless.

If he was trying to board a plane with a gun or impersonating an officer or serviceman to commit a crime I'd agree with you.

It is dishonorable but not a crime what the guy in the OP did as far as I can see.

 

[George Costanza]

The case, however, was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn, who ruled the law was unconstitutional.

Unconstitutional on what basis? I would think you would want to know that before commenting adversely on the decision.

OK - it would appear it is a First Amendment issue. This from the linked blog:

Denver attorney Christopher Beall shared the opinion that the Stolen Valor Act is flawed, saying: “The government position was that any speech that’s false is not protected by the First Amendment. That proposition is very dangerous. 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.”

I don't have much respect for someone who would do something like this, but I don't think it is a criminal act. This makes a lot of sense:

Granting that the Stolen Valor Act is flawed, what changes are necessary to fix this flaw? Because the bottom line is that hero wannabes should not be allowed to make false claims.

 

[ConHog]

The case, however, was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn, who ruled the law was unconstitutional.

Unconstitutional on what basis? I would think you would want to know that before commenting adversely on the decision.

OK - it would appear it is a First Amendment issue. This from the linked blog:

Denver attorney Christopher Beall shared the opinion that the Stolen Valor Act is flawed, saying: “The government position was that any speech that’s false is not protected by the First Amendment. That proposition is very dangerous. 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.”

I don't have much respect for someone who would do something like this, but I don't think it is a criminal act. This makes a lot of sense:

Granting that the Stolen Valor Act is flawed, what changes are necessary to fix this flaw? Because the bottom line is that hero wannabes should not be allowed to make false claims.

Don't we disallow lying in other instances? File a false police report, that's a crime. Perjury? Crime. Falsifying certain records? Crime, etc etc. So are all lies in all situations now permissible?

 

[Modbert]

Don't we disallow lying in other instances? File a false police report, that's a crime. Perjury? Crime. Falsifying certain records? Crime, etc etc. So are all lies in all situations now permissible?

Except filing a false police report, perjury, and faking certain records intentionally are all intentional dishonest things.

Legal Definition of Perjury

In order for a person to be found guilty of perjury the government must prove: the person testified under oath before [e.g., the grand jury]; at least one particular statement was false; and the person knew at the time the testimony was false.

Denver attorney Christopher Beall shared the opinion that the Stolen Valor Act is flawed, saying: “The government position was that any speech that’s false is not protected by the First Amendment. That proposition is very dangerous. 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.”

I wouldn't want this to happen. These hero wannabes are scumbags and all that needs to be done is fixing of the Stolen Valor Act so the first amendment isn't hurt.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

A man from Colorado who was masquerading as a hero had a lucky break with the federal judge who handled his case, according to a feature on the Navy Times.

Rick Glen Strandlof reportedly made claims that he was a former Marine who had been wounded while serving in Iraq. He said that he was the recipient of the Purple Heart and the Silver Star, but the military did not have any record that he was in the service. Because of this he was charged with violating the Stolen Valor Act, which stipulates that it was a crime to claim that one has won a military medal when it was untrue.

The case, however, was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn, who ruled the law was unconstitutional.
Stolen Valor Act Ruled as ?Unconstitutional? by Judge! | Navy SEALs Blog by USNavySEALs.com

Those that pose or make false claims do nothing but dishonor all those who have actually made the sacrifices and often times given their lives for this nation. It is is the lowest form of disrespect and for a Judge to see this act as a form of Free Speech when it is nothing short of theft is beyond me.

If he didn't receive anything of value from his pretense he is a loser not a criminal so I think the judge made the right decision.

He doesn't need to receive anything of value for him to violate the "Stolen Valor Act" dumbass!

Powered by Google Docs

Which is what makes the Stolen Valor Act unconstitutional.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Great Falls - A 19-year-old Washington, D.C., man who was arrested at a Montana airport has pleaded guilty to impersonating an FBI agent and saying he had a gun in his carry-on bag to see how personnel would respond. He says he wanted to observe how security responded.
The United States Attorney’s Office announced that during a federal court session in Great Falls, Malik Hannabal Shabazz., a 19-year-old resident of Washington, D.C., pled guilty to false impersonation of an officer of the United States
Criminal Justice student pleads guilty to impersonating FBI agent

The reason I put that there is simple, there is no difference between a person that would impersonate an FBI officer and one who would wear the uniform or make false claims of valor i.e. awards they did not receive or rank they did not achieve , or battles they did not appear in. In the end they are impersonating for gain even if that gain is recognition. It still makes the dishonorable, and worthless.

Really? There are legitimate concerns if someone claims to be an FBI agent at an airport, but someone claiming to be a vet cannot arrest anyone.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The case, however, was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn, who ruled the law was unconstitutional.

Unconstitutional on what basis? I would think you would want to know that before commenting adversely on the decision.

OK - it would appear it is a First Amendment issue. This from the linked blog:



I don't have much respect for someone who would do something like this, but I don't think it is a criminal act. This makes a lot of sense:

Granting that the Stolen Valor Act is flawed, what changes are necessary to fix this flaw? Because the bottom line is that hero wannabes should not be allowed to make false claims.

Don't we disallow lying in other instances? File a false police report, that's a crime. Perjury? Crime. Falsifying certain records? Crime, etc etc. So are all lies in all situations now permissible?

Telling a lie is not a crime unless it involves other activities that make it one. If you tell your neighbor that you like him when you hate him can he charge you with a crime?

 

[Navy1960]

Here is a for instance, a man uses his so called Military rewards, rank etc. to form an anti-war group that collects funds to support efforts on behalf of that group. The original group has credence lent to it due to the fact this person is impersonating Military personnel, rewards, etc . Still further, this person's gains position i.e. salary and benefits based on false representations. Those are just a few of the things one individual gained from impersonating Military personnel. It is no different than impersonating a Police Office, Fireman, etc. for the same exact reason(s) all of which are currently forbidden by law.

As to the 1st Amendment issue..

Schenck v. U.S.
The Court, in a unanimous opinion written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., held that Schenck's criminal conviction was constitutional. The First Amendment did not protect speech encouraging insubordination, since, "when a nation is at war many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight, and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right." In other words, the court held, the circumstances of wartime permit greater restrictions on free speech than would be allowable during peacetime.

In the opinion's most famous passage, Justice Holmes sets out the "clear and present danger" test:

"The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent."

This case is also the source of the phrase "shouting fire in a crowded theater", paraphrased from Holmes' assertion that "the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic."

As a result of the 9-0 decision, Charles Schenck spent six months in prison.
Schenck v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The reason why dishonorable person would misrepresent themselves as former Military or having rewards not given, battles not fought etc. is not a 1st Amendment issue is because it meets the test as well as the subsequent decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio

Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), was a United States Supreme Court case based on the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless it is directed to inciting and likely to incite imminent lawless action. In particular, it overruled Ohio's criminal syndicalism statute, because that statute broadly prohibited the mere advocacy of violence.
Brandenburg v. Ohio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Misrepresentation incites lawless action in several way's some of which I mentioned above, the mere act of represneting yourself as a former Military Officer or enlisted person is in and of itself a lawless action. So while I am sure some have sympathy for the worthelss people that want to represent themselves as something they are not, in short, what they do is not only dishonorable, it should not be protected under the consitution.

 

[Ravi]

Not sure what the Schneck case has to do with your complaint...he wasn't impersonating a soldier. That imprisonment was wrong, imo. No different than war protesters now.

In your for instance the group should fire the person.

If you don't mind me asking, why are military types so sensitive? The person doing the impersonating is disrespecting themselves for the most part, not real military personnel.

 

[George Costanza]

The case, however, was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn, who ruled the law was unconstitutional.

Unconstitutional on what basis? I would think you would want to know that before commenting adversely on the decision.

OK - it would appear it is a First Amendment issue. This from the linked blog:



I don't have much respect for someone who would do something like this, but I don't think it is a criminal act. This makes a lot of sense:

Granting that the Stolen Valor Act is flawed, what changes are necessary to fix this flaw? Because the bottom line is that hero wannabes should not be allowed to make false claims.

Don't we disallow lying in other instances? File a false police report, that's a crime. Perjury? Crime. Falsifying certain records? Crime, etc etc. So are all lies in all situations now permissible?

Oh come on, CH - are you arguing the "all lies in all situations" should be criminally punished? I don't think so.

No lie is "permissible" in a MORAL sense. However, in a LEGAL sense, there are limitations. If I lie to someone in a social setting about my age or my weight, those are both lies, but they are not (nor should they be) punishable as crimes.

The decision in this case merely holds that this type of lie is not punishable as a crime.

 

[Navy1960]

Not sure what the Schneck case has to do with your complaint...he wasn't impersonating a soldier. That imprisonment was wrong, imo. No different than war protesters now.

In your for instance the group should fire the person.

If you don't mind me asking, why are military types so sensitive? The person doing the impersonating is disrespecting themselves for the most part, not real military personnel.

He said he constructed his military persona based on real and fictional accounts gleaned from reading materials and movies. He also claimed that schizophrenia and bipolar disorder have affected his recollection of events over the past few years.

"When I talked with people about my passion about vets' issues," he said, "I believed that was the truth."

Army Spec. Garett Reppenhagen met the man he knew as Duncan at a veterans gathering two years ago in Colorado Springs. He remembers him as "spastic, a lot of energy, all over the place, an excitable person."

That night, Duncan related how he'd been wounded by an improvised explosive device during his second tour in Iraq. He told others how the explosion had caused a severe brain injury — a circumstance that seemed to explain his twitchy mannerisms and sometimes erratic behavior.

It never occurred to Reppenhagen, an infantry sniper who actually did a tour in Iraq, to dig deeper. Vets don't press other vets for combat details like that.

"You sort of feel like a jerk by even doubting someone," he said.

Besides, Duncan's intentions seemed straightforward. He sent care packages to troops in Iraq. He stood up for homeless veterans in Colorado Springs. He

Strandlof sits in the El Paso County Criminal Justice Center last week, where he awaits arraignment on a traffic charge. (Kevin Kreck, The Gazette Matt Arnold, 9News)advanced his anti-war politics by connecting with like-minded candidates.
He even launched his own organization, the Colorado Veterans Alliance, which he said represented 32,000 veterans on a massive mailing list — though the only visible members seemed to be a cadre of local vets
Many faces of 'fake vet' Rick Strandlof exposed - The Denver Post

Thats the man in question, you say should be fired from the organization he started while misrepresenting himself. I'll tell you why this matters to me and to others when someone poses as former Military such as was the case here for his or her own benefit, they bring shame to ALL those that have made the sacrifices for this nation, not only that they take from them in a fraudlent way their honor which is no better than theft. Especially when they represent themselves in such a way as to gain favor or benefits from that fraud as was the case here. I suggest you look into this case a little deeper and you might find that the name he was using was a REAL person who graduated from the USNA in 1930 and served his country honorably. So yes it's theft of the highest order no different than ID theft or someone stealing your most valuable possession.

 

[Ravi]

Frankly, he sounds bat shit crazy.

Some people think they are Jesus...it isn't a criminal offense unless a crime is committed.

 

[ConHog]

Unconstitutional on what basis? I would think you would want to know that before commenting adversely on the decision.

OK - it would appear it is a First Amendment issue. This from the linked blog:



I don't have much respect for someone who would do something like this, but I don't think it is a criminal act. This makes a lot of sense:

Don't we disallow lying in other instances? File a false police report, that's a crime. Perjury? Crime. Falsifying certain records? Crime, etc etc. So are all lies in all situations now permissible?

Oh come on, CH - are you arguing the "all lies in all situations" should be criminally punished? I don't think so.

No lie is "permissible" in a MORAL sense. However, in a LEGAL sense, there are limitations. If I lie to someone in a social setting about my age or my weight, those are both lies, but they are not (nor should they be) punishable as crimes.

The decision in this case merely holds that this type of lie is not punishable as a crime.

LOL - You know that wasn't what I was saying. In fact it seems we're saying the same thing. not all lies are crimes, but some are, it's just a matter of where do we draw the line. As I said, I'm conflicted about whether lying about one's service record should be illegal.

 

[ConHog]

Frankly, he sounds bat shit crazy.

Some people think they are Jesus...it isn't a criminal offense unless a crime is committed.

Sort of like illegaly entering our nation isn't a crime unless a crime is committed?

 

[Ravi]

Frankly, he sounds bat shit crazy.

Some people think they are Jesus...it isn't a criminal offense unless a crime is committed.

Sort of like illegaly entering our nation isn't a crime unless a crime is committed?

No, it's not. Thinking or pretending you served in the military isn't even a civil offense.

 

[Navy1960]

So far, Weber has been charged with a misdemeanor in this case for wearing several fake medals. But, it is still unclear whether he will also receive felony charges as well. He certainly violated two federal laws: impersonating a military officer, and donning military badges he did not earn, such as the Purple Heart. He appeared in court on January 14th, 2010, for a preliminary hearing.
Criminal Law - Criminal Charges Against Man Posing as Military Officer - DC Criminal Lawyer Blog

-CITE-
10 USC Sec. 771 02/01/2010

-EXPCITE-
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART II - PERSONNEL
CHAPTER 45 - THE UNIFORM

-HEAD-
Sec. 771. Unauthorized wearing prohibited

-STATUTE-
Except as otherwise provided by law, no person except a member of
the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps, as the case may be, may
wear -
(1) the uniform, or a distinctive part of the uniform, of the
Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps; or
(2) a uniform any part of which is similar to a distinctive
part of the uniform of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine
Corps.
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/10C45.txt