Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 06-11-2009, 10:22 AM

Quote:

A New York City lawyer whose father is a Dead Sea Scrolls scholar has been indicted on charges of stealing the identities of academics to discredit his father's professional rivals.

...

Defense lawyer Martin Garbus said the issue is free speech and no crime was committed.

Martin Garbus is a prominent, well regarded, aggressive trial attorney (self described "pit bull") who has handled some high profile First Amendment and intellectual property cases. He has previously represented Vaclav Havel , Nelson Mandela and Andrei Sakharov, not to mention Don Imus and Terry McMillan.

Martin_Garbus

Toto · 07-09-2009, 01:24 PM

Update:

Golb pleads not guilty - released on $15,000 bail, surrenders passport.

Accused Academic Cyberbully Pleads Not Guilty

Quote:

The defense lawyer Martin Garbus argued that the case was about free speech and that no crime had been committed.

Le Monde

Quote:

Faut-il croire que la légendaire "malédiction" des manuscrits de la mer Morte n'est toujours pas un vain mot ?

Google translate insists on translating Golb as GOLF.

The next hearing is set for September 23.

Toto · 11-04-2009, 02:27 PM

update

Quote:

A defense lawyer says parodies, pranks and freewheeling Internet discussion are at risk in a Manhattan criminal case against a man accused of using online aliases to discredit his father's academic rivals in a debate over the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Attorney Ronald Kuby asked a court Wednesday to throw out nearly all the criminal charges against Raphael Golb.

squiz · 11-05-2009, 02:09 PM

I am not in a position to judge the merits of his father's theories, but the tragedy of this is that he has brought his father theories into such disrepute, that many will disregard them, whatever their merits.

Toto · 11-05-2009, 10:07 PM

First Amendment Center

Quote:

Internet impersonation has generated various lawsuits, but prosecutions are far less common in cases that don't involve claims that the assumed identity was used to steal money, said Sam Bayard, a fellow at Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet & Society.

"It's usually very difficult to fit this into a (criminal) legal pigeonhole," he said.

. . .

"An attempt to influence a public, academic debate by e-mails and blog postings authored under assumed names cannot be an object of criminal" laws designed to protect people from fraud, threats or physical harm, Kuby wrote.

Otherwise, prosecutors could target "a vast array of online activities," from parody sites to blog comments made under aliases, he wrote.

XKV8R · 11-06-2009, 08:08 AM

good afternoon all. been a long time.

i may formulate a response to this ap story on the first amendment site.

cheers

bc

Toto · 11-07-2009, 02:42 AM

NY Times coverage

Toto · 11-09-2009, 08:00 AM

I have been referred to the brief on the motion to dismiss, which is online at http://scrollmotions.wordpress.com :

http://scrollmotions.files.wordpress...ent-motion.pdf

Unfortunately, it claims that Gadda's opponents also used multiple identities based on the Geoff Hudson website on the Aliases of Jeffrey Gibson.

:banghead:

Jeffrey Gibson · 11-09-2009, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I have been referred to the brief on the motion to dismiss, which is online at http://scrollmotions.wordpress.com :

http://scrollmotions.files.wordpress...ent-motion.pdf

Unfortunately, it claims that Gadda's opponents also used multiple identities based on the Geoff Hudson website on the Aliases of Jeffrey Gibson.

:banghead:

Butt head is right. But to be precise, it does not actually make this claim. It only insinuates it. Here's the text:

Quote:

For a compilation of other Dead Sea Scrolls internet blogger names and speculation about the identity of their authors, see the website created by Geoff Hudson entitled "Aliases of Jeffery Gibson." Ironically, it appears that Gibson, as well as Robert Cargill, have adopted multiple aliases in an attempt to influence the very academic debate that is charged herein [emphasis mine].

The irony is that the author of that remark not only gets the actual title of Hudson's web page wrong, but, much more importantly, can't see how ludicrous Hudson's claims are and how worthless his web page is.

If this is the sort of evidence he thinks is going to make his case, he can't be a very competent lawyer.

But the BC&H moderators knew that Charles Gadda was not only a pseudonym, but a pseudonym for Golb, all along, didn't you?

Jeffrey

Louise S Segal · 11-09-2009, 02:07 PM

To Jeffrey and friends: Hi, I've been following this for some time. It's interesting how you guys have all along focused on basically irrelevant details, apparently because you can't deal with the real, substantive issues that have been raised about the Scrolls over the past couple of years or now this bizarre legal case. I'd really like to try to understand this. Anyway this motion is fascinating and indeed shocking, certainly full of real, serious issues. I do think any fairminded person reading the thing will see pretty fast what's up here (nothing much to do with Jeffrey, really), and as indicated it is not at all pretty.

Yours sincerely,

Louise

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-05-2009, 02:09 PM	#4
squiz Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Munich Germany Posts: 434	I am not in a position to judge the merits of his father's theories, but the tragedy of this is that he has brought his father theories into such disrepute, that many will disregard them, whatever their merits.

11-06-2009, 08:08 AM	#6
XKV8R Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: ucla, southern california Posts: 140	good afternoon all. been a long time. i may formulate a response to this ap story on the first amendment site. cheers bc

11-07-2009, 02:42 AM	#7
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	NY Times coverage

11-09-2009, 08:00 AM	#8
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	I have been referred to the brief on the motion to dismiss, which is online at http://scrollmotions.wordpress.com : http://scrollmotions.files.wordpress...ent-motion.pdf Unfortunately, it claims that Gadda's opponents also used multiple identities based on the Geoff Hudson website on the Aliases of Jeffrey Gibson. :banghead:

11-09-2009, 02:07 PM	#10
Louise S Segal New Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 3	To Jeffrey and friends: Hi, I've been following this for some time. It's interesting how you guys have all along focused on basically irrelevant details, apparently because you can't deal with the real, substantive issues that have been raised about the Scrolls over the past couple of years or now this bizarre legal case. I'd really like to try to understand this. Anyway this motion is fascinating and indeed shocking, certainly full of real, serious issues. I do think any fairminded person reading the thing will see pretty fast what's up here (nothing much to do with Jeffrey, really), and as indicated it is not at all pretty. Yours sincerely, Louise

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.