Room Eight Fights Bronx Subpoena, Wins

Subpoena from Robert Johnson

We’re relieved finally to be able to share with the Room Eight community the details of our battle to preserve the anonymity of a blogger and commenters in the face of a subpoena from a politician the blogger had criticized.

This January, we received a subpoena (.pdf) from the Bronx District Attorney, Robert Johnson, demanding identifying details of a Room Eight blogger who wrote under the name “Republican Dissident,” as well as the authors of a dozen comments on his posts. Equally chilling, the subpoena contained a legend (above) implicitly threatening us with prosecution if we disclosed its existence.

Last week, we won our legal battle to preserve the blogger’s and commenters’ anonymity, but the story is a cautionary tale in how – whether deliberately or not -- a local prosecutor appears to have been able to intimidate an anonymous, small-scale local critic into silence.

The New York Times reports this evening that a spokesman for the District Attorney – over whose name the original subpoena, dated last October, went out – says Johnson was “not aware that a subpoena was sent nor was he aware of the content of the comments, until after the subpoena was sent. The district attorney reviewed the matter, determined that a subpoena was not necessary at this time, and directed that it be withdrawn.”

That response leaves many questions unanswered – notably, how his political ally triggered an investigation of her critic in the first place.

Republican Dissident – whose blog appeared on the back pages of this site until he took it down April 15 – wrote as a harsh internal critic of the Bronx Republican Party which, in a quirk of local politics, is closely aligned with the Bronx Democratic Party. He attacked in particular Dawn Sandow, a Republican hire to the Bronx Board of Elections staff of the county party. City investigators, according to the New York Times and the New York Post, have been looking into questions of her residence and her relationship with the chairman of the Bronx Party, Jay Savino.

Republican Dissident also took issue with the district attorney himself, calling for the Bronx Republicans to run their own candidate against Johnson, a Democrat, and calling for him to be removed from an investigation of the Bronx Republican Party. “I would get another prosecutor than Bronx DA Robert Johnson, Bronx County GP always endorses him in every election he runs in,” Republican Dissident wrote.

The district attorney’s office refused to offer any details of their investigation, leaving us with the concern that the crime they were investigating was the criticism itself, most of which involved linking – with harsh, at times mean, caricatures – to news stories and to publicly available documents, like a deed in Sandow’s name to a house outside the Bronx.

We don’t have any position on Republican Dissident’s views or his style of expressing them. We do, however, feel very strongly that he has a right to do so without fear of exposure in an investigation that – as far as we know – appears to have concerned nothing beyond his online political speech. So we chose to fight the subpoena, and were lucky to be referred – by our friend Orthomom, whom he’d represented – to a talented, dynamic lawyer at the Public Citizen Litigation Group, Paul Alan Levy, a national expert on online free speech. (Support his work here.) He and our smart, thorough, generous, and knowledgeable local counsel – Charlie Spada and Deepa Rajan of Lankler, Siffert, & Wohl – first determined that the Bronx DA was, in fact, seeking the information. Then, in May, they filed a motion to quash the subpoena in state court. (You can read the legal paperwork here.)

Two months later, after we asked the judge move on the case, the DA withdrew his subpoena. They withdrew the threat of prosecution for speaking about it only after we threatened to sue them in federal court. We’re thrilled by the outcome, and grateful to our lawyers.

But the damage may have been done: We don’t know why Republican Dissident – with whom we’ve never corresponded – took down his blog, but we can’t help suspecting the investigation had something to do with it. You can see portions of his writing here.

More broadly, the scary reality is that here in the free speech capital of the world, a prosecutor tried both to demand confidential information about an anonymous critic and insisted, under penalty of law, that his request for the information be kept secret. We’re glad he backed down, and confident that the courts would have rebuffed his demands.

But not every blogger will be lucky enough to find pro bono counsel like ours, and few can afford to pay for lawyers. In the meantime, we hope District Attorney Johnson will be able to provide more detailed answers to the unanswered questions in this case: Who ordered this investigation of a political critic to be opened? Did it proceed through the usual channels – a complaint filed with the New York Police Department, for instance – or through the D.A.’s political operatives? The chilling threat to an important new form of speech demands that the D.A. take these questions seriously, or if he doesn’t, that a credible outside investigator look into the matter.

--Gur Tsabar and Ben Smith



Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 07/14/2008 - 11:12pm.

Looks like the one person who has been calling on people to be investigated is being investigated himself.

Ironic.


Rock Hackshaw's picture
Submitted by Rock Hackshaw on Mon, 07/14/2008 - 11:14pm.
WOW!

Submitted by 628 (not verified) on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 5:45am.

"the Bronx Republican Party which, in a quirk of local politics, is closely aligned with the Bronx Democratic Party."

 Is this really a quirk?  I thought the distinctive feature of local New York politics is that the county Democratic and Republican organizations cooperate more often than not to protect each others' incumbents.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 8:56am.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 10:37am.

and when they came for me there was no one there

The issue here is monumentally important

The problem is that - unlike products liability where soeone can get rich by doing good - no one gets rich by stopping abuse like this.

Wouldn't it be nice if we had a supreme Supreme Court?

 


Submitted by Laser Haas (not verified) on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 11:21am.

It is hard enough today, for citizens to find a venue to voice, banter and debate the workings of our governments. The right to free speech in our Constitution was to assure us the right to state opinion without retribution.

We witnessed the website www.the-catbird-seat.net being ordered by a Federal justice, without a hearing involving the owner of the site, for Yahoo to yank it off the air.

Our case against cronyism and corruption, providing proof positive of DOJ rogue personnel in DE doing favortism to a former Law firm that the US Attorney was a partner of has been successful, in part, due to the Web.

Free speech is to be protected at all costs.

Lest the end result be we have no voice.

For the press, left and right, everywhere, refuses to investigate or iterate, unless sensationalism is in the story,

Even then, the WSJ Editors, ordered the reporter off from our story, that has more evidence now, than ever before.

Keep up the good work, you are added to my favorites now and cannot wonder what in the world the other site had that made it close.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 1:17pm.

<b>Irony</b> said:

 

"Looks like the one person who has been calling on people to be investigated is being investigated himself."

Police state tactics, no? 


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 3:10pm.

When you have FISA?

Lord have mercy.

Mary Alice


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 3:31pm.

Republican Dissident often made allegations of corruption against Jay Savino, Dawn Sandow, and others.

Is it possible the Bronx DA finally took these allegations seriously and now wants to question the Republican Dissident as a witness since he seems to have a lot of inside knowledge?

If the Republican Dissident really wants to send Savino to prison, he may have missed his chance by deleting all of his posts and avoiding the Bronx DA.


Submitted by EnWhySeaWonk on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 5:11pm.

I want to thank Ben and Gur for doing the right thing in this situation. As someone who used to blog anonymously, I really appreciate knowing that they would not have revealed my identity had a subpoena been issued for my information--and they knew my name, not just my IP Address.

--Matthew Carlin


Submitted by Republican Dissident (not verified) on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 5:46pm.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 5:49pm.

The DOI also reported that Dawn Sandow, the current deputy chief clerk, voted in The Bronx in 2001 through 2004 and in 2006, but testified under oath that she lived in New City, Rockland County, in 2001 through December 2004.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 7:36pm.

Ben and Gur should be ashamed of themselves for allowing Room 8 to become a vehicle for horrible slanderous, racist and downright terrible postings like the one they allow above of a black toddler saying that he "will dance for bananas". Furthermore, according to your own rules you will edit or remove postings that are hateful and vulgar.

The First Amendement does not protect hateful, salanderous, libelous, incindiary speech so stop hiding behind an ignorant interpretation.

If you google, Savino or Sandow you come up with terrible links from your room 8 that are hateful, libelous, false, incriminating and hurtful that in the end destroy their character and others.

Blogs are no longer a novelty, they are a serious form publishing as evident by their accreditation with press credentials etc. and should be held to the same standards as other publications as not to allow the defamation of people without regards.

 


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 07/15/2008 - 7:56pm.

If you read the documents posted by Room 8's lawyer, the ADA said they got IPs from other sites where the person believed to be the Republican Dissident blogged.

Since the DA withdrew the subpoena, it may be that his office might know with certainty who the Republican Dissident is and how he fits into this criminal investigation. Is he a witness or an investigative target? I have a feeling we are going to find out.

No doubt, there's a big wet spot where the Republican Dissident is standing.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/16/2008 - 2:06am.

What's most disturbing (from what I've read) is this subpoena "duces tecum" (Latin for "bring with you under penalty of punishment") demanding name, zip code, e-mail addy, and IP address, from a defendant that is called "John Doe Investigation." And to top that off with a non disclosure gag?!

It makes assumptions that you even keep logs, or your software is even capable of connecting these dot's. (From a software standpoint after seeing this, it's probably a good idea to not keep logs, times, dates, address's, email addy's, or automatically purge it.) What arrogance. Maybe this very post should be using an open WAP and TOR?

It's a good thing I wasn't picked for a grand jury like this. Jury Nullification with a strong message back would be my response.

On the other hand, 30 day's in jail and $250 bucks ain't bad to defend your users.

I live on the West Coast so I don't even claim to know what kind of politics is going on over there in the Bronx. (The only Bronx I know is a band called "Bronx Casket Co.")

But I think what disturbs me even more than this all out attack on the 1st, and 4th amendment, and the current attempt to destroy our communications on the web, is what was alluded to (in the finalsubpoena.pdf) about "electronic voting machine purchases." Now that treads on MY territory.

These electronic vote tabulation devices are destroying this country, and it is clearly corruption shoving this down your throat in New York.

With FISA, The Patriot Act, The unlimited Executive, a fascist corporate media, one must wonder who will be the next honest citizen turned into a criminal and be tortured (Financially and Mentally) by this corrupt infestation of "Rat-F**kers" into our American system of government.

I'd like to see WHO John Doe Investigation is. I'd also like to see them made an example of for abusing the legal system, and trampling on Constitutional rights, if not whether there is just an all out corruption on the inside from the source of the complaint!

If the US Constitution doesn't matter anymore, then we are no longer a "Constitutional Republic" and I would have to say by proxy, no longer a nation of laws, and therefore no longer bound by such laws.

Of course this will play out on individual basis, as to the severity of the specific situation and chances of the exploitable ability to uphold the US Constitution against oath breaking fascists.

Note that I not once said Democrat vs. Republican or Left wing media, Right wing media. It's neither, it's FASCISM. It's media that blacklists, and spins to their corporate masters. And it stopping the public from being informed.

Welp, I'm off to tour the economy. Good luck keeping your investments, might I suggest The Market Ticker to get you up to speed.

Health, Wealth, and Prosperity everyone...


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/16/2008 - 11:05am.
Apparently the DA office has nothing better to do than to investigate comments from an anonymous blogger about something that is one person's personal thoughts. Seriously....this is ridiculous. I don't even live in New York but I think they should have to pay back any portion of the tax payers money that was wasted on this retarded subpoena.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/16/2008 - 3:03pm.
Instead of the Bronx DA's office going after some blogger who gave enough proof of corruption and political patronage, why doesn't the Bronx DA go after the drug dealers, rapists, the perverts who rape children and many other quality of life crimes that are reducing us into third worldism each minute. What I see here is that the Bronx DA was doing a favor for some political thug who lied to the Bronx DA about this whole thing. The ADA and the political thugs should have charges brought against them. We cannot lose our freedom of speech in this country. So to to all silent bloggers, keep on speaking your mind and let the authorities know about civil and political corruption. Did this Bronx ADA read all the blogs and see that these people that were feeding him all this info, that they were the ones who were breaking the laws.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/16/2008 - 3:41pm.

Send the boys over to send a message, it is the same that the Bronx DA's office did that John Gotti would have done>


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/16/2008 - 4:20pm.

It's been alleged that Johnson's subpoena of Room 8 is an attempt to suppress dissent and criticism.

Johnson has been Bronx DA since 1987. Like all politicians, he has earned his share of his criticism especially after he said in 1995 that he would never seek the death penalty.

Has Johnson ever used his office to go after critics the way Spitzer did as AG?

Johnson doesn't need the support of the Bronx GOP to stay in office. He never has. So why would he go after Room 8 unless they are investigating a real crime?

Yes, his office could have handled it better, not imposing the gag order and saying what the crime was.

 


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/16/2008 - 4:56pm.

Stormtrooper tactics do not work in America.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/16/2008 - 9:13pm.
The Bronx DA should court order a lie detector test to be conducted on Savino and Sandow.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/16/2008 - 9:24pm.
What is it that Savino is coming out with this before the Bronx DA did. Was this whole death threat letter a hoax used to muddy the waters of the DOI investigation that they were under. The Bronx DA should perform a lie detector test on Savino and Sandow. What about the fight that Dawn Sandow had with another Bronx Board of Elections coworker Kim Paterson, in which Kim Paterson threatened to cut Sandow's throat. Kim Paterson was later disciplined and demoted in pay and what about the discrimination law suit that Bronx Board of Elections coworker Frank Tosi has just filed against Dawn Sandow.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/16/2008 - 11:46pm.

When I started reading these posts, I thought there might actually be somethng to be concerned about.

However, it has now been reported by several legitimate news organizations that the subpoenas were in fact connected to a legitimate criminal investigation of someone making graphic and quite horrible death threats apparently to co-workers and thier families.

Many times you see law enforcement not taking such threats seriously until something happens.  So, it now sounds like the DA was acting properly after all.  If the cops did not do all they could to catch this person, they would not be doing their job.


Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 07/17/2008 - 10:16am.

1) Lie detectors are inadmissible.

2) If they don't produce the result you're looking for (showing that Savino and Sandow are lying about getting threats and thus manufactured them), you can always say that the test was faulty or the DA is covering up.


Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.