UPDATE: Children given lifelong ban on talking about fracking

[Tsiyu]

Children given lifelong ban on talking about fracking

snip

She was still troubled by the gag order, however. "My concern is that they're minors. I'm not quite sure I fully understand. We know we're signing for silence for ever but how is this taking away our children's rights being minors now? I mean my daughter is turning seven today, my son is 10."

The children's father, Chris Hallowich, went on to tell the court it might be difficult to ensure the children's absolute silence on fracking – given that their ages and that the family lives in the middle of a shale gas boom.

"They're going to be among other children that are children of people within this industry and they're going to be around it every day of their life, that if they in turn say one of the illegal words when they're outside of our guardianship we're going to have difficulty controlling that," he said. "We can tell them, they can not say this, they can not say that, but if on the playground....."

The court transcripts were released in response to an open records request by the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, which first reported on the children's lifetime gag order. The newspaper has been fighting for the release of all documents in the Hallowich settlement.

snip

So now we have mere babies being forced to sell their free speech rights to obtain compensation for the harm done to them.

We do live in interesting times. Link here .

Sorry, everyone. Was researching environmental regulations and came across this older story.

Looks like the company backtracked according to this story.

Range Resources attorney James Swetz told the judge that when it came to the settlement agreement, the family was defined as the “whole family,” referring to the questions by the parents, the judge, and the parents’ lawyer as “ancillary.”

“That’s what we’ve agreed to,” Swetz told the court. “Putting aside all these other issues and sort of ancillary topics, that’s what the settlement says, and that’s what we’ve agreed to at this point.”

Range Resources seems to now be distancing itself from its lawyer’s remarks, insisting the gag order applies only to the parents.

“Those comments are not accurate from our former outside counsel and are not reflective of our interpretation of the settlement,” wrote spokesman Matt Pittzarella in an email to StateImpact. The seven and ten year olds are free to discuss whatever they wish now and when they are of age.”

So the mofos tried to silence the babies, but looks like they realize that's just not gonna happen. The attorney for the family could find no case law about gag orders for minors, but real shady try on the defendant's part.



Sorry for any confusion, but I wonder how the gag order has worked out, and the case does make you wonder how far polluters will go to have what they want.

[SummerSnow]

1. very interesting

[Tsiyu]

4. And no matter what anyone says about them, the adults can't go online and defend themselves

transcript


How do you stop kids from talking? How can this be legal, in the sense that they are too young to consent to such a draconian stipulation?

[SummerSnow]

11. This cannot be legal.

No one has rights anymore. Censorship, suppression of free speech, no freedom of expression, the list goes on and on.

[Tsiyu]

13. Well, my old eyes read 2105 rather than 2013

but apparently the kids are cool.

But gag orders are common just so the injured parties can get some relief.

It's sad that they are allowed, but who writes the laws? Imagine the laws we'll get with this new Congress.

[SummerSnow]

15. I can see it now..

mandatory prayers in schools, replace guidance counselor with Chaplains. Bible classes. etc

[Tsiyu]

16. Hang on cuz we are in for a wild ride!

Back to bloomers and proper dresses for the ladies, too!

[Omaha Steve]

2. Doesn't seem right to me

K&R!

[Tsiyu]

5. Pretty sick, I think.

The worst of the worst are running our environmental justice system.

There should be laws in place that disallow any settlement with such a stipulation. I wonder if the Supremes have ever tackled the issue.

[Trillo]

3. How can minors be held to such a contract?

My guess as a non lawyer is that they can't once they are adults. Thus its value is in training before they become adults.

If kids can be held to such a contract, made not by them but by their parents, then why can't they consent to sex with other kids, or perhaps even with adults, before they're 18?

[Tsiyu]

7. Yeah, this opens up a lot of wormy cans

Can you sell your kid into marriage, too?

The reality is, the aggressors and polluters held off settlement until the family was broke and sick and desperate.

That our courts allow such, that judges watch these plaintiffs twist in agony as they sell their souls just for relief from duly acknowledged harm, tells me a great deal about judges. And tells me more about fracking interests.

They get all the profits; their victims get all of the sacrifice.

[drm604]

6. Can minors really be subject to such orders?

Maybe when they're minors, but what happens when they turn 18. They never consented to this order, minors can't legally consent to such things as far as I know.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. "Every thing secret degenerates, even the administration of justice

"Every thing secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and publicity." Lord Acton

[Tsiyu]

17. Nice quote there, T y L nt

[drm604]

9. The article is ambiguous.

According to the article Jame Swetz, the company's lawyer said that their position was that it applies to the whole family.

However, the company later said that it doesn't apply to the children.

However, once that gag order came to light, two years after the August 2011 proceedings, the company told reporters it did not agree with Swetz's comments. "We don't believe the settlement applies to children," a Range Resources spokesman told the Gazette. He went on to tell the paper that there was no evidence that the Hallowich family was affected by exposure to gas development.

This article just muddies the situation.
http://www.post-gazette.com/local/washington/2013/08/07/Hallowich-children-not-part-of-Marcellus-Shale-gag-order-agreement/stories/201308070133

Anyone have any more recent information on this affair?

I find these types of agreements to be very troubling.

[Politicalboi]

10. They tell us fracking is safe

So why the gag rule. If people weren't dying of cancer due to fracking why the gag. The frackers should stop fracking should be the rule. Don't give them anything to talk about, so no gag order, no fracking.

[Tsiyu]

18. You got it, Polboi

Last edited Sun Jan 25, 2015, 11:48 PM - Edit history (1)

If their product is safe, why the need to stifle the details?

They'll just say: "Proprietary info" meaning they don't want their competitors to learn their exact cocktail of toxins.

Sick, isn't it?

[Panich52]

12. Lots of info on this...

I googled "range resources gag order" & a lot of articles came up, incl'd Steve Colbert.

Yall see Range Resources ads? "Fracking is just the beginning."
That's what we're afraid of...

Water pollution, methane, earthquake 'swarms'...

[Tsiyu]

14. It's all insane

Like I said above, imagine the gutted environment we're going to get with this new Congress if Obama isn't vetoing everything?

[Ramses]

19. This is life in Fascist America

Where profit is King and people are fucked.

[Tsiyu]

20. It appears that way.

Maybe people will have enough of it one day.