Rarely do things in the legal world surprise me, anymore.  Disbelief, maybe, but not surprise.  Take, for instance the case of U.S. v. Osinger.  Seems Mr. Osinger and the love of his life had a falling out, after only 9 months, and she left him.  Seems Mr. Osinger didn’t like that and begged her to come back.  He didn’t just beg her, he texted her, he “threatened” to post pictures of her on the Internet, he, well, he was a real pain in her backside and he continued to be so even after she moved to California (from Chicago).  Seems Mr. Osinger was so intent on getting his girl back that he went so far as to post nude photos of his ex on the Internet.  I mean, if that doesn’t exude true love, what does?!  Seems, however, Ex didn’t like that all that much and called the police resulting in Mr. Osinger’s incarceration for stalking.

Here’s where the disbelief kicks in.  See, Mr. Osinger appealed his conviction for stalking his ex and his defense was, among other things, that his postings of the nude photos were constitutionally protected free speech.  What he (or his attorney) is saying is that his rights of free speech supersede those of his ex’s right of life liberty and her pursuit of happiness.  That Mr. Osinger didn’t like that the relationship was over doesn’t change the fact that his actions amounted to him falsely shouting “FIRE” in a crowded theater.  He may have a right of free speech – but not when it infringes on the rights of another’s right to not have nude pictures posted on the Internet (without their approval).  What is particularly disturbing is that he had an attorney representing him on this case and the best argument they could rally was that a person has the right to mess with another person.  Unbelievable.