What she was doing was legal according to the court. McKay concluded, among other things, that "not all emails relating to state business are necessarily public records, and that the "use of private email accounts to conduct state business does not -- in and of itself -- violate state law."
http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=11867946 So what happens when the whistle-blower is wrong? Not that that would even apply in this case. On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Judah McAuley <ju...@wiredotter.com> wrote: > > I'm curious where you feel her role as a public official comes into > play with this. She was using the Yahoo account for government > business and seemed to indicate that she was doing so, in part, to > evade public records laws. If someone in her office had seen damning > emails in that account and put them out there, I would consider it a > valid case of whistleblowing as she was using the account for > government business. This case is obviously different because it is > someone outside the whole deal who gained unauthorized access and then > put everything out in public view. I don't think that's right but on > the other hand, I think that correspondence in her official capacity > in that account is fair game for being looked at by the public. So I'm > a little conflicted. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:317371 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
