197
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

The writings of the person who killed three 9-year-olds and three adults at a private Christian elementary school in Nashville last year cannot be released to the public, a judge ruled Thursday.

Chancery Court Judge I’Ashea Myles found that The Covenant School children and parents hold the copyright to any writings or other works created by shooter Audrey Hale, a former student who was killed by police. As part of the effort to keep the records closed, Hale’s parents transferred ownership of Hale’s property to the victims’ families, who then argued in court that they should be allowed to determine who has access to them.

Myles agreed, ruling that “the original writings, journals, art, photos and videos created by Hale” are subject to an exception to the Tennessee Public Records Act created by the federal Copyright Act.

The shooter left behind at least 20 journals, a suicide note and a memoir, according to court filings. When the records requests were denied, several parties sued, and the situation quickly ballooned into a messy mix of conspiracy theories, leaked documents, probate battles and accusations of ethical misconduct. Myles’ order will almost surely be appealed.

all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] [email protected] 62 points 1 week ago

Good.

We don't need to feed Christianity's martyr complex.

Just an endless search for justifications to be the victim. An endless desire to be the victim.

[-] brbposting 6 points 1 week ago

If the killer’s parents were approached by Fox/TMZ who wanted to turn just a few pages into some whacko documentary, would it be right to withhold the rest of the lunatic ramblings?

IDK how to feel about this, just know it’s weird

[-] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

The victims families own the copyright, not the killers parents.

They transferred ownership to the victims families so anyone looking to make money off of it would be paying the victims families.

[-] brbposting 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I’m wondering about precedent. With my “if”, think “how would courts rule if in a future case …” or “how would we feel …”

(commented a little more in this thread as well)

[-] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago

The article states that the parents signed over the killer's estate to the victims' parents.

[-] brbposting 5 points 1 week ago

Which is why this case might feel fair to plenty of people. If you’re allowed to sign over an estate, though, and you sign it over to someone with a profit motive, maybe you’re allowed to essentially sell evidence the public is normally entitled to.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago

It's based on the Son of Sam law and (likely) the killer's family saw a way to alleviate the victim's worries by signing over the rights.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago

I know exactly how to feel about this- we shouldn't be promoting the writings of a mass murderer. We should forget his name and just remember his victims.

And it seems like the parents of those victims agree.

[-] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago

this sounds like ai generated bs for the onion but goddamn if we haven't arrived lol jesus

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Writings should be released to expose their motive. The judge could put an order any money made be given to the family. But the public is mature enough to read it.

Edit: Hollywood pumps out movies constantly with war and gun violence themes but suddenly we’re not mature enough to handle this? Or is it the writing of a bullied trans kid that bothers them so much? Well now we won’t know.

[-] [email protected] 19 points 1 week ago

You're missing the point entirely. Releasing the material was, presumptively, part of the shooters motivation. Increasing the notoriety of the perpetrator. Releasing the material would validate the shooters motives and encourage copycats. I don't know why you would think that's not enough.

[-] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago

How is this different from any other shooting where there is a manifesto left behind? This is nothing new and it is very common that they are released very shortly after the shooting.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago
  1. It's becoming less and less common. Stephen Paddocks motives weren't released til 3 years or so later. If the Uvalde shooter had one it wasn't released. Anything known about the Newtown shooter was found by journalists way later. The rest happen when the killer is still alive.

  2. This is the only case that I know of where the killers writings are under control of the victims families.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

They are released very quickly if they fit the desired political narrative, just look at the buffalo shooter and how quickly every major news article dove into his manifesto as soon as they got their hands on it. If and when it can be used to promote a specific view it is released, if it doesn’t promote the correct view it sits for a while until they can figure out how to spin it or the hype dies down and if it hurts the desired view it is blocked like this one.

I would also suggest that you never speak or write any of these assholes’ real names. The notoriety is what they seek and every time a stranger mentions them by name they get their wish.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Ask a question then reply telling me I'm wrong? Whatever doofus.

The Buffalo shooter also livestreamed part of his shooting on twitch, with a swastika on his weapon. The media getting information is significantly different than police releasing information. Assuming media orginaztions are in a conspiracy to push a narrative and not just squeezing every dime they can out of these tragedies is goofy. And I'm writing some of their names to demonstrate that my knowledge of these crime is a little beyond average.

I'd suggest you pull your head out of your ass.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

The media are absolutely working together to push specific political viewpoints. This specific manifesto being blocked fits perfectly with the openly stated political goals of the majority of media in the US.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

A judge in Tennessee is the one preventing the release of this manifesto. Media outlets are the ones trying to obtain it. Try again.

load more comments (20 replies)
[-] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

It's not about the public's 'rights' tho. It's about the victims' families and their rights ... which in this case the judge decided on the side of the families.

I for one am glad of that because it gives the families at least some sense of control over a situation they originally had zero control over.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Gun regulation is control which is declined.

A judge Giving away first amendment rights seems wrong. Making an “exception” to a law made specifically for this.

Seems to me it would only be blocked if it was embarrassing. Everyone in the shooters life could’ve failed them because they’re ’good Christian’s’. The kid could’ve also been insane but now we won’t know will we.

[-] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago

Ok. So how would you personally benefit from the killer's writings being publically released?

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

Maybe I wouldn’t send my trans kid to that school if it’s a place known for fostering hate.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago
[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

That doesn’t tell the public anything about why a shooting occurred.

[-] [email protected] -3 points 1 week ago

You stated that knowing the school's name would help you. The school's name is public. Therefore your 'want' has been fulfilled.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

I wanted to know why the shooting occurred at that particular school. Nothing has been done. Especially if there was anti-trans sentiment being used against the shooter daily. It being a Christian private school would fit the narrative. Totally speculative but a person who murders their bullies instead of just killing themselves is a more believable scenario

[-] [email protected] -3 points 1 week ago

Then pressure the police to complete their investigation and release the findings.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

That’s probably why all those groups mentioned in the article are suing

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

They're not suing. They filed a public records request with the cops.

The ruling, filed just before midnight Thursday, comes more than a year after several groups filed public records requests for documents seized by Metro Nashville Police during their investigation into the March 2023 shooting.

load more comments (5 replies)
this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2024
197 points (98.0% liked)

News

21860 readers
3505 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS