On Halloween of 2006, 18 year old Nikki Catsouras took her father's Porsche without permission. Her joyride ended in her death when she struck a toll booth at 100 mph.
Nikki was the daughter of Christos and Lesli Catsouras. The Catsouras family lives in the affluent Ladera Ranch area of Orange County, California. Theirs was a picture-perfect family. Christos was a wealthy successful realtor. His blonde wife, a proud mother. They had it all: success, good looks, and all the luxuries and trappings of affluence and high social status. Their idyllic lives changed abruptly with the tragic loss of their 18 year old daughter Nikki.
But losing their daughter was just the beginning of a sordid nightmare steeped in an Internet netherworld that celebrates death and suffering, a sub-culture of depravity that is difficult to comprehend.
California Highway Patrol Officers Leak Death Scene Photos
Two California Highway Patrol (CHP) dispatchers, 39 year old Thomas O'Donnell and 30 year old Aaron Reich, leaked pictures of the accident scene and Nikki's horrific death onto the Internet.
The teen was immortalized in a sub-culture of morbidity and dubbed "Porsche Girl."
Within days of Nikki's death, the Catsourases were deluged with emails and text messages accompanying the grisly accident scene photos of their once-living 18 year old daughter. Some of the text messages and emails sent by mysterious cyber bulllies said, "What a waste of a Porsche" , "Whoo-hoo! I'm still alive!", and "that spoiled rich girl deserved it."
The Catsouras family has suffered enormous grief over the loss of Nikki. But that didn't matter to some heartless people on the Internet.
These incidents kept occurring. So Christos and Lesli Catsouras are fighting back. They're suing the CHP for invasion of their right to privacy by releasing photos of Nikki's gory death on the Internet. The suit demands $20 million in damages.
The Catsourases are also seeking a court ruling to force those exploiting Nikki's death scene pictures to remove the photos from the Internet. The CHP dispatchers who released the pictures have been disciplined. O'Donnell was suspended for 25 days without pay. Reich ended up quitting.
But objections to the Catsouras suit are being raised under the protection of freedom of speech pursuant to the 1st Amendment.
Ist Ammendment v. Right To Privacy
Freedom of speech is not the sole issue. The question of whether the Catsouras family's right to privacy was impinged is also raised by the suit. There is also the matter of where free speech crosses the line.
Free speech protection does not extend to terrorism, cyber bullying, or harassment. The 1st Amendment does not give anyone permission to yell "fire!" in a crowded movie theater. Rights and freedoms do not come without limits.
Medical professionals are prohibited from releasing personal health information pursuant to HIPPA. Authors and journalists cannot trespass onto private property and sneak pictures of you in the nude while bathing and release those pictures without your consent.
Rights also come with the caveat of responsibility. Clearly, the two CHP officers abrogated theirs — causing immeasurable harm for a deeply hurting family.
What is the duty of police? They're supposed to protect and serve, and fight crime. But that's not what O'Donnell and Reich did. Their unauthorized release of those photos made the Catsouras family targets for harrassment and cyber stalking.
If the CHP has written policy prohibiting the unauthorized release of grisly accident photos, then the two officers responsible for leaking Nikki's crash site pictures cannot invoke their 1st Amendment rights.
It is unfortunate that repulsive and heart-wrenching situations such as this are used to test the limits of free speech. It is even more unfortunate that anyone would use this "right" to deliberately hurt a grieving family by exploiting the death of their 18 year old daughter.
The copyright of the article Nikki Catsouras — Test Case For 1st Ammendment in Law is owned by Jacqueline S. Homan. Permission to republish Nikki Catsouras — Test Case For 1st Ammendment in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.
I just read your story in Newsweek. I looked up Nikki's name just to leave
a message to you, not to view any of the photos. It is truley sad that you
have to be going through this. The world is full of people with no respect.
I had a thought of a potition online. Maybe if you get enough people to
sign it that could make a diffence. You may have already done that, Im not
sure. I just want to let you know that there are good people out in the
world and I am truley sorry for your pain and the future hardache of all
you are going through. I cant sign this like I normally would... My
name is Niki also. I dont want to offend you or hurt you anymore than you
and your family have already been hurt. I hope you get Justice for Nikki,
and for all of your family.
May 6, 2009 1:45 AM
Guest :
An excellent article outlining the entire story. I had seen snippets of it
elsewhere but you have both drawn the emotional aspect of what her family
has gone through clearly and compassionately and also explained the
problems of dealing with public abuse on the internet. The first amendment
does not allow one to libel someone else publicly, but, sad as it may be,
it does allow for the sort of thing that's been done in this case, and the
freedoms guaranteed by the amendment are too important to allow it to be
tinkered with - even if it's the cause of pain sometimes.
A very
well done article and my heart does indeed go out to her family.
Michael J. McFadden
May 6, 2009 1:52 AM
Jacqueline S. Homan :
Michael:
I don't know if the 1st Amendment allows people to use
the Internet to harrass or stalk someone. I also don't think the 1st
Amendment allows someone to torment/harrass another with traumatizing and
bullying emails and text messages. When the Constitution was drafted and
ratified, there was no such thing as the Internet.
May 6, 2009 12:36 PM
Guest :
They didn't have Porche's or highways when the Constitution was written,
either. Our Constitution is mostly written in the abstract to be flexible
to changing circumstance. They may not have foreseen the internet, but the
basic principles can still be applied. I don't condone the CHP
officers violating regulations, but neither should they be blamed for
other's malicious acts. And it seems that this was a criminal act on public
property recorded by public officials. Shouldn't that info be available to
the public? Do we really want our government to be secret in so many
different areas? I don't. This was evidence of a crime, and, as such,
shouldn't be kept from the public, no matter how horrific the graphical
images may be. What if a private individual had taken photos of the
accident scene and distributed them? Isn't that well within their rights?
They could have even profited from them, but they couldn't be held
accountable for what others did with those images without their permission,
and any lawsuit regarding loss of privacy would be dismissed outright. As a parent, I can empathize, but ultimately, Nikki was an adult who
broke the law, endangering herself and others (she wan't the only person
hurt), by driving under the influence and her wild, reckless driving. Let's
not forget who is really responsible here. No accident, no need for
pictures, right? As for "causing immeasurable harm" to her
family, wasn't that actually Nikki? It's strange to see so much sympathy
for Nikki and her family, but no sympathy for the forgotten non-related
victim of Nikki's irresponsible behavior. Finally, don't such pictures
serve to inform and educate? Should we bury our heads in the sand, not
publishing graphic war images or the desperate plight of those in
unfortunate circumstances? Isn't the price of free speech tolerance? It may
not always be pretty, but isn't the alternative even uglier? -wilywascal
May 14, 2009 1:37 PM
Guest :
I think those 2 dispatchers deserve alot more than suspension. They deserve
not only jail time but physical violence against them, maybe then they can
feel a fraction of the pain that they have caused this family. As if the
loss wasn't enough, they have had to take extreme measures to protect their
younger daughters. And at the same time, this truly shows how worthless so
many people in this country are. Its real easy to do things like this to
people you don't know, but I promise, these same people sending these
pictures to the father and family would not want this done to them. What
has this country come to when this is going on. The only solace is the fact
that Nikki is now in a place where no more can she feel any harm. I only
wish her family could have this same peace, and be able to remember her as
she was, a beautiful young lady.
May 15, 2009 6:44 PM
Guest :
Cops are above the law and they know it. There are too many of them and
lawers (DA's and judges) that allow their felonious activities - as a
professional courtesy. The dispatchers should have been jailed and fined,
but all they got was a slap on the wrist. Look at what happens to hospital
staff who just look at a medical record that they are not supposed to.
May 19, 2009 8:39 PM
Guest :
This is how freedoms are lost, idiotic and irresponsible people abuse their
freedoms, set up not to allow one to cause harm to another but to ensure
that any organization or groups of individuals are not allowed to suppress
the rights of others.
Calling this a first amendment issue is
abstract and pointless, no ruling that would possibly be handed down by a
court would further anyone's freedoms in this case it would just give
legitimacy to the sick twists out there that would harass this family under
some weak pretense of "defending free speech". There is no
political group being oppressed or artist being censored in this case, the
only people being oppressed is the family that has to live on with the
memory that their child's torn body is now memorialized on the internet by
a bunch of unethical fools.
On a far more violent note, I would
love the opportunity to gut one of those two men or the idiots who continue
to spread this shit around and berate their families with the pictures of
their bodies.
May 26, 2009 9:01 AM
Guest :
why do they even show pictures the people who posted them have no mercy at.
the poeple who posted them suck my balls ..
Jul 27, 2009 5:37 PM
Guest :
Get over it people. Would you feel sorry if she was some poor street girl?
NO. I can't say I feel sorry for the rich people in this world who feel
they can do whatever they want. I see the family is suing for approximately
20 million. What are they going to do with the money? Buy the other brats a
$150,000 Porsche? How can you put a price on it? Looks like that just want
more money. Greedy idiots.
May 1, 2009
