NAPA
669 posts
This is insane... Boston Public Library (@BPLBoston) is hosting NINETEEN drag queen story time events for CHILDREN during Pride Month. THESE are three drag queens who will be reading to YOUR children. They mock Jesus's crucifixion, post hyper-s*xualized photos, and perform lap dances. Your tax dollars are paying for this.
Today was the first hearing in the H.A.M. (Higgins, Albert, McCabe) lawsuit against Karen Read and Aidan “Turtleboy” Kearney.. which the public did not see as a protective order was filed prior to the hearing. 🧐 3 out of the 4 plaintiffs in this lawsuit, Brian Albert, Jen McCabe, and Brian Higgins, are also “house defendants” in Karen Read’s separate civil lawsuit connected to the Fairview allegations that was filed last November. That lawsuit was quickly moved out of Massachusetts state court and into federal court by the house defendants, where cameras are generally not permitted. Supporters, including some who openly claim to communicate directly with members of that group, have repeatedly said the move was done to avoid the media circus, online attention, and public spectacle surrounding the case. Now, before this brand new lawsuit has even really begun, there is already a push for a protective order. These are also the same people who, throughout testimony and interviews, have repeatedly spoken about harassment, online commentary, public scrutiny, and being targeted throughout this case. But let's all remember: the actual victim in all of this is John O’Keefe. 💙 Per TB this morning, his side intends to oppose the protective order. I would assume Karen Read’s team will oppose it as well. ➡️ Arguments on the protective order are now scheduled for Thursday, June 4th at 10:00 AM in Plymouth Superior Court. ⬅️ And regardless of whether there is Zoom access or livestreaming, Massachusetts law has long recognized a presumption of public access to court proceedings and court records. Massachusetts appellate courts have repeatedly stated that, absent a lawful reason for closure or impoundment, courtrooms are expected to remain open to the public. Federal courts also recognize strong public-access rights under both the common law and the First Amendment. That does not mean every document, hearing, or remote stream must automatically be public in every circumstance. Courts can limit cameras, remote viewing, or seal certain materials under specific legal standards. But public judicial proceedings are not supposed to simply disappear from public scrutiny altogether without justification. And honestly, attempts to limit public visibility in high-profile cases often end up creating the exact opposite effect. The more people feel like access is being restricted, the more attention the case receives. People start digging deeper, following the filings closer, and showing up to hearings in person. Welcome to the Afroman effect - aka the new age Streisand. 🫶
