Free Speech in Civil Society graphic

Inauguration Day protesters, including some rioters, swept up in police dragnet – January 20, 2017

Washington, D.C.

On January 20, 2017, the day of President Donald Trump’s inauguration, hundreds of protesters participated in an “anti-capitalist, anti-fascist” demonstration organized by the group Disrupt J20. The rally turned violent after Trump’s swearing-in, resulting in the arrest of more than 200 individuals. The people charged say they were subject to cruel treatment while under arrest. As of July 6, 2018, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia was no longer pursuing the case.

Key Players

Sam Menefee-Libey is a member of the Dead City Legal Posse, an organization that provides legal support and funds for those arrested on January 20. He has become a de facto spokesperson for the J20 protesters.

Alexei Wood, Britt Lawson, Jennifer Armento, Oliver Harris, Michelle Macchio, and Christina Simmons were the first six arrestees to stand trial, on December 21, 2017, 11 months after the events. Wood is a freelance photojournalist, and Lawson is a nurse who said she was acting as a medical volunteer at the protests.

Jennifer Kerkhoff is an assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. She served as lead prosecutor in the first J20 trial.

Scott Michelman is a senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington, D.C. The ACLU filed a lawsuit against the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) for arresting innocent protesters, detaining people for more than 16 hours without water or food, and allegedly sexually assaulting detainees.

Further Details

The morning of January 20, hundreds of thousands of demonstrators gathered at different locations around Washington, D.C., to protest the inauguration of President Donald Trump. One of the groups, Disrupt J20, began congregating in the Logan Circle area around 10:20 a.m. The protesters engaged in a practice known as “black bloc” — meaning they were clad in black and covered their faces — to ensure mass anonymity and shield themselves from potential “doxxing,” or having one’s identity shared on the internet without consent, usually with malicious intent. Within a half-hour, some protesters began breaking the glass of several storefronts, including an Au Bon Pain cafe and a Bank of America branch office. According to Kerkhoff, one police officer suffered a broken wrist after being pelted with bricks, hammers, and crowbars.

The group had announced its intentions on its website well before the inauguration, saying that it was planning “a series of massive direct actions that will shut down the Inauguration ceremonies and any related celebrations,” including inaugural balls. Using a variety of tactics, it said, it would “paralyze the city itself, using blockades and marches to stop traffic and even public transit.”

As soon as small numbers of people began rioting, police deployed a tactic known as “kettling.” Officers surrounded the mass of protesters and closed in to prevent any of them from leaving without being arrested. Two hundred and thirty-four protesters were kettled and charged with felony riot. However, according to The Independent, a superseding indictment filed later in D.C. Superior Court charged 212 protesters with inciting to riot, rioting, conspiracy to riot, destruction of property, and assault on a police officer. Together, these charges carry sentences of at least 50 years in prison for each individual.

On June 21, 2017, the ACLU filed a lawsuit after learning that detainees had been held for as long as 16 hours without water, food, or access to bathrooms. The complaint also denounced MPD for alleged sexual harassment and assault, after at least four detainees said they were ordered to remove their clothing by police, who then grabbed their genitals and subjected them to manual rectal probing. The complaint was later amended to include as plaintiffs a woman and her 10-year-old son, who said they were peacefully protesting when they were knocked down and pepper-sprayed. During a press conference announcing the lawsuit, Michelman said, “No one should have to fear arrest or prosecution for coming to the nation’s capital to express opinions peacefully, no matter what those opinions may be.”

In the following months, the government reduced or dropped some of the charges, according to The Intercept. The remaining 194 defendants in the government’s case were subsequently divided into groups of fewer than 10 people each to stand trial, with the first trial of six defendants beginning on November 15, 2017. The government’s position, argued by Kerkhoff, was that by dressing in black, moving through the streets with the group, and chanting slogans, the defendants had willfully associated with a riot. The prosecution admitted on the first day of trial that it would not present any evidence that the defendants had committed any acts of violence or vandalism.

Outcome

First six defendants acquitted of all charges

Wood, Lawson, Armento, Harris, Macchio, and Simmons were found not guilty of all charges in a jury held on December 21, 2017. Menefee-Libey told The Intercept that the protesters saw the verdict as a rebuke of prosecutors for the government’s effort to effect collective punishment. One of the jurors in the case later anonymously said the verdict was not a close call, reported The Intercept.

Government initially drops charges against majority of defendants, proceeds with 59 cases

The prosecution dismissed the charges it had brought against 129 other protesters in a January 18, 2018, court filing. “In light of the legal rulings by the court and the jury’s verdicts in the first trial of these cases, the government has decided to proceed with all of the pending charges set forth in the superseding indictment,” Kerkhoff wrote in the filing. That meant 59 other defendants remained, who the government said were directly involved in the rioting. A second trial involving four defendants began on May 14, 2018.

Prosecutors drop rest of charges

After it failed to secure any guilty verdicts during the second trial (which ended in either acquittals or mistrials on various charges against the four defendants), the government began gradually dropping charges against 20 others of the accused. On July 6, 2018, the prosecution filed a motion to dismiss all remaining charges against the other 35, effectively ending a case that lasted more than a year and a half. Upon the announcement. Bill Miller, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for D.C., said the office still “believes that the evidence shows that a riot occurred on January 20, 2017, during which more than $100,000 in damage was caused to numerous public and private properties,” reported WAMU.

External References

“The J20 Arrests and Trials, Explained,” Teen Vogue

“J20 protests: All you need to know about the nearly 200 people facing 60 years in jail for protesting Trump,” The Independent

“J20 protests: What it’s like to face 60 years in prison for protesting Trump,” The Independent

“The J20 Case: What You Need to Know,” It’s Going Down

“Inauguration protesters were ‘playing a role in the violence and destruction,’ prosecutor says,” The Washington Post

“D.C. cops used ‘rape as punishment’ after Inauguration Day mass arrests, lawsuit says,” ThinkProgress

“ACLU-DC Names 27 D.C. Police Officers and Adds 10-Year-Old Boy As Plaintiff in Inauguration Day Lawsuit,” ACLU-DC

“Why My Son and I Are Suing D.C. Police,” Medium

“Were Inauguration Day protesters rioting or lawfully demonstrating? That’s the question for jurors,” The Washington Post

“Jurors to Decide What Constitutes Journalism in Trial of J20 Inauguration Protests,” The Intercept

“Not-guilty verdicts for first six people on trial in violent Inauguration Day protests,” The Washington Post

“Jury Acquits First Six J20 Defendants, Rebuking Government’s Push for Collective Punishment,” The Intercept

“Government says it is dropping most remaining Inaugural Day rioting cases,” The Washington Post

Dead City Legal Posse

About #DisruptJ20

Prepared by Jesus Rodriguez ‘19

Uploaded April 30, 2018

Updated July 31, 2018

 

Free Speech in Civil Society graphic

New York Times hires, then fires, editorial writer who befriended neo-Nazis – February 13, 2018

New York, NY

On February 13, 2018, The New York Times announced it had hired journalist Quinn Norton to be the paper’s lead editorial writer on technology. Later that day, however, the Times said she would not be joining its editorial team after all. This announcement came after a flurry of activity on Twitter revealed that Norton had previously referred to a writer for a neo-Nazi website as a friend and had tweeted gay and racist slurs.

Key Players

Quinn Norton is a freelance journalist who has been active since 2006, when she began writing about the Internet, hacking, the organization Anonymous, the Occupy movement, and issues surrounding intellectual property. She wrote for the magazine Maximum PC for five years, and has contributed to publications such as WIRED, Gizmodo, and The Atlantic.

James Bennet is editorial page editor of The New York Times. He supervises a staff that has experts covering issues ranging from business, international affairs, and criminal justice to education and legal affairs. Norton would have covered technology for the editorial board.

Further Details

On the morning of February 13, 2018, the Times announced via Twitter that Norton would be joining its editorial team, tweeting that she would be covering “the power, culture, and consequences of technology.” After the announcement, reported the Chicago Tribune, Twitter users began circulating old tweets in which Norton used gay and racial slurs. According to the Tribune, she tweeted and retweeted the n-word on more than one occasion. Norton’s connection to neo-Nazi Andrew Auernheimer resurfaced as well. Famous for his identity as an internet troll, Auernheimer, who is known on the internet by the name “weev,” now works for The Daily Stormer, a neo-Nazi website which, according to the Tribune, is “known for attacking Jews, women, immigrants and people of color.” Norton had tweeted in October 2017 that “weev is a terrible person, & an old friend of mine.”

Only six hours after the Times’ initial announcement, Norton responded to it, tweeting, “As I said so many times to the @nytimes, no harm no foul. I’m sorry I can’t do the work I wanted to do with them. I wish there had been a way, but ultimately, they need to feel safe with how the net will react to their opinion writers.” In a separate series of tweets, she attempted to explain and justify many of her controversial tweets that had resurfaced throughout the day.

Bennet responded to the situation with his own statement, writing, “Despite our review of Quinn Norton’s work and our conversations with her previous employers, this was new information to us. Based on it, we’ve decided to go our separate ways.”

Outcome

Norton no longer involved with The New York Times

After a firestorm on Twitter, Norton and the Times dissolved their agreement, and she did not join the editorial team. The editorial board announced on April 11 that it had hired writer Jeneen Interlandi to cover health, science, and education, but as of April 27 no one had been hired to fill the position Norton would have held.

External References

New York Times hired, then quickly unhired, writer who tweeted about befriending neo-Nazis, Chicago Tribune

The NY Times Fires Tech Writer Quinn Norton, and it’s Complicated, WIRED

After Storm Over Tweets, The Times anda New Hire Part Ways, The New York Times

Tweet by @NYTimesPR, February 13 2018

Tweet by @quinnnorton, February 13 2018

Quinn Norton Wikipedia entry

Prepared by Emma Vahey ‘20

Uploaded April 30, 2018

YouTuber Logan Paul faces backlash after posting video of suicide victim – December 31, 2017

Sea of Trees Forest, Fujikawaguchiko, Japan

Vlogger Logan Paul came under fire after posting a video on YouTube on December 31, 2017, that showed his encounter with the corpse of a suicide victim in a Japanese forest. The video was removed just two days later, but its initial publication ignited weeks of outcry on social media. YouTube issued an official condemnation of the incident and later distanced itself from Paul.

Key Players

Logan Paul is a 22-year-old internet personality who regularly uploads comedic videos to YouTube, a practice known as vlogging. Paul has monetized his videos, meaning that he profits from the advertisements placed on his channel, which currently has more than 16 million subscribers. Although he chose not to monetize the video in question, Paul earned $12.5 million from his other videos in 2017.

YouTube is the Google-owned, video-sharing social network that hosts Paul’s content. Through its advertising program, Google Preferred, companies place ads on channels that the website identifies as highly influential.

Further Details

On December 31, 2017, Paul posted a 15-minute YouTube video in which he wades into the Sea of Trees Forest in Japan, a place notorious for its high incidence of suicides. Early in the video, he happens upon the body of a suicide victim. He laughs and remarks, “Bro, did we just find a dead person in the suicide forest?” and “Are you fucking with us?” Later, when someone in his crew says he is uncomfortable, Paul jokes, “What, you’ve never stood next to a dead body before?” and laughs. In the video, he also urges people who are experiencing mental illness to seek help.

Two days after posting the video, and after it had received six million views, Paul removed it from his channel. By then, however, people on social media were decrying the vlogger for trivializing suicide, and a petition calling on YouTube to delete his channel had amassed 671,000 signatures. He issued a written apology on Twitter, saying he had “never made a mistake like this before” and that he did not “do it for views.” The following day, Paul issued another apology, this time in a video, in which he expressed regret for publishing the Sea of Trees Forest video and asked his fans not to defend him. He ended by promising to “be better.” That same day, a YouTube spokesperson confirmed to CNN that the video violated the website’s standards by portraying gory content in a “shocking, sensational or disrespectful manner.”

On January 9, 2018, YouTube posted an open letter to Twitter that condemned the incident, adding that suicide should never be “a driving force for views.” The next day, YouTube announced a series of sanctions against the social media star.

Outcome

YouTube removes Paul as a preferred ad partner and cancels future projects with him

YouTube announced on January 10, 2018, that it would no longer include Paul in the Google Preferred program, meaning that his videos would not be flagged as highly influential for advertisers. The company said it would cut Paul from the fourth season of its original comedy series “Foursome” and would suspend any future projects with the vlogger.

Paul’s channel remains active

After YouTube’s sanctions, Paul continued to post videos weekly. He recently renewed his social media notoriety by posting a video in which he is shown tasing rats. As of March 7, 2018, his channel’s subscriber base had grown to nearly 17 million.

External References

Logan Paul’s original video

Logan Paul Apology: Read It in Full, The Independent

YouTube’s open letter

YouTube says Logan Paul video violated its policies, CNN

The Social-Media Star and the Suicide, The Atlantic

Logan Paul, YouTube Star, Apologizes As Critics Slam Video Showing Dead Body, NPR

Logan Paul: Following the YouTube controversy, should social media have the same regulations as journalism? The Independent

YouTube distances itself from Logan Paul as it drops him from comedy series in the wake of suicide video scandal, Daily Mail

Delete Logan Paul’s YouTube Channel, Change.org

The World’s Highest-Paid YouTube Stars, Forbes

Prepared by Jesus Rodriguez ‘19

Uploaded March 20, 2018

 

ESPN’s Jemele Hill sparks White House controversy with anti-Trump tweets – September 2017

Washington, DC

ESPN SportsCenter host Jemele Hill posted two tweets on September 11, 2017, expressing her dislike of President Donald Trump. They elicited a strong backlash on Twitter and in the media, leading a reporter to ask White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders to comment on them. She called Hill’s tweets a “fireable offense.”

Key Players

Jemele Hill is a black sports journalist from Detroit. She joined ESPN in 2006 as a national columnist on ESPN.com, before beginning a podcast with fellow sports journalist Michael Smith called His & Hers. In February 2017, Smith and Hill became evening co-anchors of SportsCenter. Their show was called SC6 with Michael and Jemele. In September 2017, she posted a series of tweets criticizing President Trump. Two of them read:

“Trump is the most ignorant, offensive president of my lifetime. His rise is a direct result of white supremacy. Period.”

“Donald Trump is a white supremacist who has largely surrounded himself w/ other white supremacists.”

Sarah Huckabee Sanders is the only daughter of former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. After managing her father’s presidential campaign in 2016, she became the Trump campaign’s senior advisor handling communications for coalitions. When Trump won the election, Huckabee Sanders was named deputy White House press secretary. Following Sean Spicer’s resignation, she assumed the role of press secretary in July 2017. She is the third woman ever to hold the position.

Further Details

The day after Hill’s tweets incited an immediate backlash, ESPN tweeted out a statement, which read, “The comments on Twitter from Jemele Hill regarding the President do not represent the position of ESPN. We have addressed this with Jemele and she recognizes her actions were inappropriate.” In a White House press briefing the following day, a reporter read Hill’s tweets out loud to Huckabee Sanders and asked her to comment. The press secretary called them some of “the more outrageous comments that anybody could make and certainly something that I think is a fireable offense by ESPN.”

That same day, the National Association of Black Journalists released a statement supporting Hill’s right to speak freely “on all matters of discussion, within and outside the world of sports, as they do not impinge on her duties as a host and commentator,” reported NBC News.

A few days after Hill’s tweets were posted, Trump weighed in from his Twitter account. He tweeted, “ESPN is paying a really big price for its politics (and bad programming). People are dumping it in RECORD numbers. Apologize for untruth!”

Ratings for SportsCenter in the 6 pm time slot did drop 20 percent year-over-year after Hill and Smith became hosts, compared to when Lindsay Czarniak headlined the show, reported Forbes. However, ESPN’s overall ratings are decreasing regularly. Pardon the Interruption, for example, saw a similar drop.

Outcome

Jemele Hill suspended from ESPN following a second social media violation

Despite Huckabee Sanders’ claims that Hill’s tweets were a “fireable offense,” ESPN did not dismiss the sports anchor. However, the company did take action when in October 2017 Hill reportedly violated its social media guidelines a second time. When Cowboys Head Coach Jerry Jones threatened to bench any of his players who “disrespect the [American] flag” and kneel during the national anthem, Hill responded on Twitter by suggesting people who disagreed with Jones ought to boycott his team’s advertisers. As a result, ESPN suspended her for two weeks. Her tweets on the topic, posted on October 8 and 9, read:

Jerry Jones also has created a problem for his players, specifically the black ones. If they don’t kneel, some will see them as sellouts.”

“If you strongly reject what Jerry Jones said, the key is his advertisers. Don’t place the burden squarely on the players. […]”

“Just so we’re clear: I’m not advocating a NFL boycott. But an unfair burden has been put on players in Dallas & Miami w/ anthem directives.”

“If fans really are that upset about what JJ & Stephen Ross have done, don’t call the players sellouts, but you’re watching every Sunday.”

Following the announcement of Hill’s suspension, Trump took to Twitter once more. On October 9, 2017, he tweeted, “With Jemele Hill at the mike [sic], it is no wonder ESPN ratings have “tanked,” in fact, tanked so badly it is the talk of the industry!”

Jemele Hill leaves ESPN’s SportsCenter

In January 2018, it was announced that Hill would move from SC6 to The Undefeated, an ESPN digital news outlet that analyzes sports, race, and culture, reported Variety. Despite rumors that she was demoted or removed from the show, according to Forbes, Hill took to Twitter to claim that the move was her own decision. “I asked to leave the show,” she wrote. She also thanked her co-host, Smith, the SC6 staff, and her SportsCenter colleagues.

External References

Did Jemele Hill Get Demoted From SportsCenter Or Request The Move To ‘The Undefeated’?, Forbes

Donald Trump’s Tweet

Jemele Hill, known for anti-Trump tweets, is leaving ESPN’s SportsCenter, Vox.com

Jemele Hill Will Leave ESPN’s ‘SportsCenter’, Variety

White House Says ESPN Should Fire Anchor Who Called Trump White Supremacist, NBCNews

Jemele Jones Suspended by ESPN over Jerry Jones Tweets, The Cut

Cowboys owner Jerry Jones says anthem protests are damaging the NFL, The Guardian

Jemele Hill Suspended by ESPN After Response to Jerry Jones, The New York Times

Prepared by Bridget McElroy ‘18

Uploaded March 19, 2018

Protests outside Turkish ambassador’s residence in Washington turn violent – May 16, 2017

Washington, D.C.

On May 16, 2017, a group of protesters who had gathered across from the home of the Turkish ambassador to the United States were assaulted by embassy security guards, bodyguards for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and other non-affiliated individuals. Local police intervened to stop the attacks, but not before eleven people were injured, nine of whom were taken to the hospital. In the aftermath, two U.S. citizens pled guilty to their involvement in the assault, and 15 Turkish security officials and four other individuals were indicted for their role in the altercation.

Key Players

Recep Tayyip Erdogan is president of Turkey. He served as prime minister from 2003 to 2014, and was elected president in Turkey’s first-ever direct elections in 2014. His time in power has seen many controversial incidents:

In late May 2013, anti-government demonstrations broke out in Istanbul. The protests began when a small group of demonstrators gathered in Gezi Park, located in Istanbul’s Taksim Square, to protest Erdogan’s plan to bulldoze the park and build a mall in its place. They were angry about the negative impact razing the park would have on the environment. Turkish police tried to clear the park using tear gas and water cannons, injuring more than 100 people, The Guardian reported. The protesters were eventually cleared, but demonstrations spread across the country in response to what many perceived as excessive force on the part of police in Istanbul.

In December 2013, a corruption probe was launched to investigate more than 50 government officials, including members of Erdogan’s inner circle. The government dismissed some350 police officers before the prosecutor eventually ceased the inquiry.

In July 2016, Erdogan faced an attempted coup by a portion of the Turkish military. Addressing the nation via Facetime, he urged his supporters to go into the streets and demonstrate against the military. The coup was eventually put down.

In April 2017, a constitutional amendment passed via referendum, with 51 percent of the vote. It disbanded the Turkish parliament, gave more power to the executive, and made it possible for Erdogan to remain in power until 2029. International election monitors questioned the legitimacy of the referendum result, in light of last-minute changes to the voting process and state media coverage that was biased in favor of its passage.

Further Details

On May 16, 2017, Erdogan met with President Donald Trump in Washington, D.C. During a joint press conference, he pledged to help the U.S. fight terrorism and praised Trump for his election. Trump commented that the U.S. and Turkey have a “great relationship” and that “[they] will make it even better.”

Meanwhile, approximately 24 demonstrators gathered outside the Turkish ambassador’s residence, waiting for Erdogan’s return from the White House. The group included Americans, Kurds, and Armenians who opposed the Turkish president’s policies. They gathered in Sheridan Circle, across from a group of Erdogan’s supporters, including government security forces and other armed individuals. A line of D.C. police officers initially separated the protesters from the pro-Erdogan forces, but the latter group soon rushed across the street through the police lines and attacked the protesters. The police attempted to break up the fighting.

A video posted to Voice of America’s Turkish language service showed the attacks on the protesters. Another video also showed Erdogan watching as he exited his car and entered the residence.

Flint Arthur, of Baltimore, Maryland, one of the anti-Erdogan demonstrators involved in the clash, told CNN, “We are protesting (Erdogan’s) policies in Turkey, in Syria, and in Iraq. . . . They think they can engage in the same sort of suppression of protest and free speech that they engage in in Turkey. They stopped us for a few minutes . . . But we still stayed and continued to protest Erdogan’s tyrannical regime.”

The following day, the U.S. State Department issued a statement condemning the violence. It read, “We are concerned by the violent incidents involving protesters and Turkish security personnel . . . . Violence is never an appropriate response to free speech, and we support the rights of people everywhere to free expression and peaceful protest,” reported Politico. The State Department also reportedly reprimanded the Turkish ambassador for the incident. In response, Turkey’s Foreign Ministry lodged a complaint with the U.S. ambassador to Turkey about the police’s role in halting the incident. It blamed U.S. authorities for their “inability . . . to take sufficient precautions” to prevent violence. The complaint also alleged that U.S. “security personnel” had taken “aggressive and unprofessional actions.”

The Turkish embassy claimed that the protesters were affiliated with the PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party), a terrorist organization that has been in conflict with the Turkish government for 30 years. Embassy officials insisted that the protesters were “aggressively provoking Turkish-American citizens who had peacefully assembled to greet the President” and who “responded in self-defense,” reported CNN and Politico. In contrast to these allegations, DC Police Chief Peter Newsham announced in June 2017 that there was no evidence the protesters were associated with any terrorist group.

On September 19, 2017, Erdogan told PBS Newshour that Trump had apologized for the incident. Erdogan said he was sorry as well, but he maintained that the protesters had instigated the violence and that local law enforcement was slow in stepping in to stop the fighting, reported Business Insider.

A group of Republican lawmakers called the incident an “affront to the United States.” Senator John McCain of Arizona tweeted, “This is the United States of America. We do not do this here. There is no excuse for this type of thuggish behavior.”

Outcome

Turkish government blamed U.S. law enforcement, protesters for violence

The Turkish government alleged that the protesters were responsible for inciting the violence, and claimed they were affiliated with the PKK, a terrorist group in Turkey. President Erdogan also claimed that U.S. law enforcement was slow in responding to the violence.

19 people indicted, two American citizens pleaded guilty

In the immediate aftermath of the incident, two people were arrested: Ayten Necmi, of Woodside, New York, was charged with aggravated assault, and Jalal Kheirabaoi, of Fairfax, Virginia, was charged with assault on a police officer, reported The New York Times. The two were allegedly among the protesters.

In August 2017, U.S. officials indicted 19 other individuals for their role in the incident. Fifteen were Turkish security officials, and four were individuals not associated with the Turkish government. Several of them faced charges of assault with a deadly weapon, reported CNN. All 19 faced felony charges of conspiracy to commit a crime of violence, reported CBS News.

In December 2017, two U.S. citizens, Sinan Narin and Eyup Yildirim, pleaded guilty to charges of assault with significant bodily injury. Video footage showed the two kicking protesters in the head while they were on the ground, reported The Washington Post. They are not known to be associated with the Turkish government.

External References

Turkish forces clear Istanbul park, CNN

Failed coup in Turkey: What you need to know, CNN

Turkey tests Trump’s patience after protesters roughed up, Politico

In video, Erdogan watches as his guards clash with protesters, The New York Times

International monitors deliver scathing verdict on Turkish referendum, CNN

Turkey referendum: Erdogan declares victory, CNN

State Department condemns violence by Erdogan security guards at D.C. protest, Politico

Recep Tayyip Erdogan Fast Facts, CNN

Turkish president: Trump told me he was ‘sorry’ for bloody protest in DC, Business Insider

Turkish security officials indicted following Erdogan’s May DC visit, CNN

Protesters injured outside Turkish embassy in DC after Trump-Erdogan meeting, CNN

Erdogan security forces launch ‘brutal attack’ on Washington protesters, officials say, The New York Times

More arrests in attack on protesters at Turkish embassy, CBS News

Two U.S. citizens offer guilty pleas for attack outside Turkish embassy, The Washington Post

Prepared by Graham Piro ‘18

Uploaded March 5, 2018

Subpoena of Jamie Kalven – December 2017

Judge protects reporter from revealing his sources

Chicago, IL

A Chicago police officer accused of killing an African American teenager attempted to force Jamie Kalven, the independent journalist who uncovered evidence of the shooting, to reveal his sources, for the purposes of the defense in the officer’s murder trial. Though Kalven was reportedly prepared to face jail time rather than comply, a Cook County, Illinois, judge rejected the officer’s subpoena.

Key Players

Officer Jason Van Dyke is accused of killing Laquan McDonald, a 17-year-old African American man, on October 20, 2014. A police dashboard camera video, released by court order on November 25, 2017, allegedly shows that Van Dyke shot McDonald 16 times, according to the Chicago Tribune. The video’s publication inspired weeks of protests, the firing of the police superintendent, and a critical examination of the Chicago Police Department by the U.S. Department of Justice. Van Dyke is charged with 16 counts of aggravated battery, six counts of first-degree murder, and one count of official misconduct. His indictment marks “the first time a Chicago police officer has been charged with first-degree murder for an on-duty fatality in nearly 35 years,” reported the Tribune.

Jamie Kalven is an independent journalist who investigated McDonald’s death. It was Kalven who revealed the existence of the video that documents the incident, reported The New York Times. His story about the killing, titled “Sixteen Shots,” was published by Slate in February 2015. Kalven is the founder of the Invisible Institute, an independent news organization based in Chicago. His father, Harry Kalven Jr., was a professor at the University of Chicago Law School and a First Amendment scholar. After his father’s death, Jamie Kalven completed his unfinished book about the First Amendment.

Further Details

Jamie Kalven brought the death of Laquan McDonald into the national spotlight by questioning the actions of Officer Jason Van Dyke and revealing the existence of dashboard-camera footage that documented the incident. With the help of two anonymous sources, Kalven discovered that McDonald had been shot 16 times. An autopsy report, as well as the dashboard-camera video, sharply contrasted with the police department’s report that McDonald had “lunged at police” before being shot. Shortly after Kalven’s story was published, protests against the police erupted in Chicago.

Van Dyke, whose trial is pending, filed a subpoena to discover Kalven’s sources of information relating to the shooting. The officer’s attorney suggested that the journalist had “obtained leaked documents and may have passed along that information to witnesses of the shooting, influencing their accounts to investigators,” reported the Times. Specifically, he posited that Kalven may have received statements made by Van Dyke to the Independent Police Review Authority, an agency conducting an internal investigation of the incident. Public employees have a right not to incriminate themselves during investigatory interviews by their employers. This right, often referred to as a “Garrity Right,” is rooted in the 1967 United States Supreme Court decision, Garrity v. New Jersey. Van Dyke’s legal team alleged that Kalven had obtained and reported on the police officer’s Garrity-protected statements.

Kalven resisted the subpoena, and 18 news organizations, joined by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, filed an amicus curiae brief in support of him. “The public interest in protecting confidential sources is particularly compelling in this case,” the brief asserted. “Kalven’s reporting exposed misconduct by the Chicago Police Department and an official cover-up that led to a public accounting and an investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice.”

On December 13, 2017, the subpoena was rejected by Judge Vincent Gaughan. However, his decision rested primarily on the “inadequacies of the subpoena itself rather than Kalven’s legally protected status as a reporter,” according to the Tribune. The judge determined that Kalven may have received information from multiple legitimate sources, and there existed no evidence that he ever was leaked protected material.

Kalven, who had expressed a willingness to face imprisonment rather than reveal his sources, attended the court hearing concerning his subpoena wearing his press identification around his neck. “I think it’s part of the job description to uphold a covenant with sources,” he told the Tribune. “The real hero in this case is a source within law enforcement who provided information … that enabled me and others to report on it. We have kind of a sacred trust with sources.”

Outcome

Kalven will not be compelled to reveal his sources

Judge Gaughan ruled that Van Dyke had failed to demonstrate that Kalven’s testimony would be relevant to the case. “To uphold the subpoena of Jamie Kalven would be nothing more than a fishing expedition in search of information that the timeline of events, discovery documents and testimony suggest simply does not exist,” he wrote.

External References

Journalist Who Told Laquan McDonald’s Story Faces Fight Over Sources, New York Times

Sixteen Shots, Slate

Laquan McDonald reporter won’t be forced to testify at Chicago cop’s hearing, Chicago Tribune

Amicus Curiae Brief by News Coalition and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

Van Dyke indicted on 16 added counts for each shot to Laquan McDonald, Chicago Tribune

Van Dyke lawyers want activist-journalist Jamie Kalven on the stand, Chicago Sun Times

Prepared by Will Haskell ‘18

Uploaded on January 25, 2018

 

Public displays of disrespect for Trump cause firing, arrest – October – November 2017

Herndon, VA

Two women were penalized for public acts of protest against President Donald Trump late in 2017. Juli Briskman, a former employee at Akima LLC, a federal government contractor, was fired in October after a photo of her giving the middle finger to Trump’s motorcade went viral. In November, a Texas woman, Karen Fonseca, was arrested near Houston on an outstanding felony warrant for fraud after she had displayed a profanity-laden sticker criticizing Trump on the rear window of her pickup truck.

Key Players

Juli Briskman was photographed “flipping off” President Trump’s motorcade while riding a bicycle next to it. She had been employed for six months at Akima LLC, a government contractor that works with public and commercial service providers, before being dismissed.

Karen Fonseca was arrested in Rosenberg, Texas, after she had displayed a sticker in the rear window of her pickup truck that read, “FUCK TRUMP AND FUCK YOU FOR VOTING FOR HIM.” She was released on bail, and the district attorney’s office is not pressing charges against her.

Further Details

Briskman posted the photo to her Facebook profile and Twitter account, and initially did not identify herself as the biker. However, she confirmed her identity to friends, and word spread online. A yoga studio where Briskman also worked asked her to remove any mention of it from her Facebook page, due to threatening emails the studio had received and negative comments on the studio’s own Facebook page. She complied. After she received the request from the yoga studio, she informed the human resources department at Akima about the incident. A day later, she was fired, reports The Huffington Post.

Akima said Briskman was dismissed for allegedly violating the firm’s social media policy, which states that “Covered Social Media Activity that contains discriminatory, obscene malicious or threatening content, is knowingly false, create [sic] a hostile work environment, or similar inappropriate or unlawful conduct will not be tolerated and will be subject to discipline up to an [sic] including termination of employment,” reports The Washington Post. According to The Huffington Post, Briskman was told that her gesture toward the presidential motorcade was considered obscene.

During her six months at Akima, Briskman was in charge of the company’s Facebook page. She told The Guardian that she had found an obscene comment from a senior director at the company who was engaged in an online debate concerning the Black Lives Matter movement. He deleted the comment, and apparently was not fired.

Briskman wasn’t the only person to face consequences in 2017 for protesting Trump. Karen Fonseca was arrested by the sheriff’s department in Rosenberg, Texas, after locals called in to complain about the profane, anti-Trump sticker on her truck. She was allegedly taken into custody on an outstanding warrant for fraud, but Fonseca asserts that the timing of the arrest was directly related to her having exercised her right to free speech in a manner critical of the president and his supporters. She was soon released on bail, and then added another sticker to her rear window that read, “FUCK TROY NEHLS AND FUCK YOU FOR VOTING FOR HIM.” Troy Nehls is the sheriff who had arrested her, and had threatened her with a charge of disorderly conduct. She, in turn, has threatened to take legal action against the sheriff’s department.

Outcome

Briskman considering legal action against company, receives financial support

Briskman said in interviews that she had consulted the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) about the situation, but that she had not decided whether to take action against the company. In the meantime, a GoFundMe page started to support her while she looks for new employment had received $133,805, as of January 4, 2018.

External References

Woman fired for flipping off Donald Trump’s Motorcade, The Huffington Post

Cyclist who gave Trump the middle finger: ‘He wasn’t going to hear me through the glass, The Guardian

The biker who flipped off President Trump is now out of a job, The Washington Post

Fundraiser for Juli Briskman by Rob Mello

She put an obscene anti-Trump message on her truck and was arrested. Now she might sue. The Washington Post

‘F**k Trump’ decal woman adds a profane slam of Texas sheriff to her truck, Salon

Woman with crude anti-Trump decal arrested for fraud, CBS News

Prepared by Graham Piro ‘18

January 10, 2018

Public radio station cancels event with prominent biologist over anti-Islam comments – August 2017

Berkeley, CA

KPFA, a public radio station in Berkeley, California, cancelled a planned public event featuring scientist Richard Dawkins, due to protests over past comments he had made regarding Islam.

Key Players

Richard Dawkins is a prominent evolutionary biologist and author. He is particularly well-known for his outspoken atheist views. Dawkins was scheduled to participate in a live discussion and book signing, organized as a fundraiser for the radio station, part of the Pacifica network. He would have been promoting his new book, “Science in the Soul: Selected Writings of a Passionate Rationalist,” a compilation of 42 of his essays concerning scientific thought and inquiry.

Further Details

In 2013, Dawkins tweeted, “Haven’t read Koran so couldn’t quote chapter & verse like I can for the Bible. But often say that Islam greatest force for evil today.” In an article published in The Telegraph on June 11, 2017, Dawkins expanded on this sentiment, saying, “If you look at the actual impact that different religions have on the world it’s quite apparent that at present the most evil religion in the world has to be Islam.” He added that he does not believe all Muslims are evil; rather, they “suffer more from Islam than anybody else.”

The New York Times reported that KPFA received messages criticizing Dawkins’ planned appearance. A former KPFA board member complained that Dawkins is an Islamophobe. Lara Kiswani, executive director of the Arab Resource and Organizing Center, wrote to the station that Dawkins’ comments “give legitimacy to extremist views.”

In an email to ticket-holders, KPFA wrote that it had booked the event so Dawkins could discuss his new book; station representatives said they “didn’t know he had offended and hurt – in his tweets and other comments on Islam – so many people.” While the station supports free speech, the email said, it does not support “abusive speech.” It apologized for not having known of Dawkins’ comments before inviting him. Bob Baldock, the events coordinator for KPFA, told the Times he supported the decision to cancel, but described it as a “fraught decision.” He also said he could not think of another station event that was cancelled because of content in the thirty years he had worked there.

In an interview with the Times, Dawkins said of the cancellation, “Many people are saying this is a freedom of speech issue, and of course it is. But it’s actually more a freedom of listening issue. People bought tickets because they wanted to hear me.”

Outcome

Richard Dawkins writes open letter in response to cancellation, requests apology

In an open letter, Dawkins criticized KPFA’s decision and asserted that if the station had done “rudimentary fact-checking,” it would have “concluded that [he has] never used abusive speech against Islam.” He said he had criticized the “pseudoscientific claims” of “Islamic apologists” and the “appalling misogyny and homophobia of Islam,” and that he thinks “Muslims themselves are the prime victims of the oppressive cruelties of Islamism.” Dawkins also pointed out that he has criticized Christianity, too, but has never been “de-platformed” for that. He concluded the letter with his expectation of a public apology from the radio station.

External References

Cancellation of Richard Dawkins Berkeley Event Baseless and Unconscionable

Radio station cancels Richard Dawkins appearance over Islam tweets, The Independent

Richard Dawkins: religious education is crucial for British schoolchildren, The Telegraph

Richard Dawkins event canceled over past comments about Islam, The New York Times

Richard Dawkins hits back at allegations he is Islamophobic after Berkely event is cancelled, The Independent

Richard Dawkins event cancelled over his ‘abusive speech against Islam, The Guardian

Prepared by Graham Piro ‘18

January 5, 2018

Google – August 7, 2017

Google employee fired for critiquing company

Mountain View, CA

James Damore, a former senior software engineer at Google, was fired on August 7 for violating the company’s code of conduct by circulating a memo in which he criticized Google’s hiring and training practices that are intended to increase diversity within the company. He argued in the memo that there are biological reasons for the gender disparity in the tech industry, and he also claimed that the company reinforces ideas and beliefs held by a large number of its workers. After being fired, Damore filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board and is currently pursuing legal action against Google.

Key Figures

James Damore started working at Google in December 2013. According to a profile in The Guardian, he excelled in his work at the company and was promoted to senior engineer in early 2017. He wrote the memo in June and sent it in early July to the organizers of Google’s diversity meetings. He did not receive a response, so he began circulating the memo to internal forums and mailing lists within Google. On August 5, Vice reported that the memo had gone “internally viral,” and later that day Gizmodo published the memo in its entirety.

Danielle Brown is Google’s Vice President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance. She previously worked at Intel before being hired by Google in late June 2017. On August 5, she issued a response to Damore’s memo, stating that Google did not endorse his views.

Sundar Pichai has been CEO of Google since August 2015. On August 8, he sent a memo to Google employees stating that he supported the rights of employees to express their opinions, but that this memo expressed harmful stereotypes.

Further Details

In January 2017, the US Department of Labor filed a lawsuit against Google after the company allegedly failed to hand over its data concerning equal pay for its employees. On April 7, The Atlantic reported the department had found that Google’s labor practices involved “systemic compensation disparities against women pretty much across the entire workforce.” The Guardian reported that Google is 69% male and that in the tech industry overall, only 20% of jobs are held by women.

In his memo, Damore wrote that the “overwhelming majority of the social sciences, media, and Google lean left,” and that Google was “shaming into silence” dissenting views on diversity that created “an ideological echo chamber.” He then discussed possible non-bias-related causes of the gender gap in the tech industry. He wrote that “[w]omen generally have stronger interest in people rather than things,” “women generally [have] a harder time negotiating salary, asking for raises, speaking up, and leading,” and “neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance) … may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report” and “to the lower number of women in high-stress jobs.” Damore then laid out potential solutions for increasing the representation of women in tech, including making software engineering more people-oriented, making tech and leadership less stressful, and allowing men to be more feminine. He criticized Google’s “discriminatory practices” like a “high priority queue and special treatment for ‘diversity’ candidates,” “[p]rograms, mentoring, and classes only for people with a certain gender or race,” and “[h]iring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates.” The memo concludes with Damore giving Google advice to “demoralize diversity,” “stop alienating conservatives,” confront its own biases, be “open about the science of human nature,” and stop the restriction of programs and classes to certain genders or races.

In Danielle Brown’s response to the memo, she wrote that she “found that [the memo] advanced incorrect assumptions about gender,” that Google did not endorse the views Damore espoused, and that Google employees “must feel safe sharing their opinions.” “Diversity and inclusion are a fundamental part of our values and the culture we continue to cultivate. We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company, and we’ll continue to stand for that and be committed to it for the long haul,” Brown wrote.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai sent a response to Google employees on August 7 after news broke of Damore’s memo. Pichai wrote that he supported the rights of Google employees to express their views, but that “portions of the [Damore] memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.” He continued, “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK. It is contrary to our basic values and our Code of Conduct, which expects ‘each Googler to do their utmost to create a workplace culture that is free of harassment, intimidation, bias and unlawful discrimination.’” He stressed that some Google employees were hurt by the memo, and he acknowledged that other employees were questioning whether or not they could express their views in the workplace after Damore’s firing. He also acknowledged that many of Damore’s concerns had merit. “[Many] points raised in the memo — such as the portions criticizing Google’s trainings, questioning the role of ideology in the workplace, and debating whether programs for women and underserved groups are sufficiently open to all — are important topics,” he wrote.

After the backlash against his original memo began, Damore added a paragraph at the beginning with the heading, “Reply to public response and misrepresentation.” In that paragraph, Damore wrote that he values diversity and inclusion, that he is not denying sexism exists, and that he is not endorsing stereotyping. “Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo chamber,” he wrote.

He added that he had received personal messages from fellow Google employees who expressed gratitude to him for raising the issues he discussed, and who “would never have the courage to say or defend [his views] because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired.” Wired reported that leaked internal messages showed some Google employees supported Damore’s ideas. Motherboard reported that a Google employee, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that some employees disagreed with what Damore was saying, but believed he should have a voice, and that a few expressed that they agreed with Damore’s views and thought he was brave. Another employee said, “The fact that colleagues are calling for him to be fired—on very public forums—proves his point that there is an ideological silo and that dissenting opinions want to be silenced,” reported Motherboard.

On August 11, Damore wrote an op-ed titled “Why I Was Fired by Google” in The Wall Street Journal. He said he had engaged in discussions with some of his peers after he circulated the original memo internally in early July, but that he was mostly ignored. Once the memo went viral, Google’s human resources department and Damore’s superiors received emails from individuals who demanded “censorship, retaliation, and atonement.” He accused upper management of shaming and misrepresenting his views, but acknowledged that the management couldn’t do otherwise because “The mob would have set upon anyone who openly agreed with me or even tolerated my views.” He concluded by writing that Google was walking “blindly into the future” by ignoring issues raised by its diversity policies.

After his firing, Damore did two interviews with Stefan Molyneux, a right-wing YouTube personality, and Jordan B. Peterson, a University of Toronto psychology professor known for his controversial statements regarding gender and who also has a large YouTube following. Damore told Molyneux that Google was hypocritical for firing him and that conservatives in the company feel the need to “stay in the closet.” He told Peterson that he had declined to speak to mainstream news outlets because he believed they would “twist whatever I say towards their agenda.” The Guardian reported that at Peterson’s behest, Damore began doing more interviews with other right-wing YouTube figures, including Ben Shapiro and Milo Yiannopoulos.

Outcome

Damore files complaint with NLRB over firing

On August 8, Damore filed an unfair labor practice complaint with the National Labor Relations Board. Wired reported that Damore hired Harmeet Dhillon, a prominent San Francisco Republican, as his attorney to explore legal action against Google. This action could potentially involve other ex-Google employees, the article reports.

Damore speaks out

In an interview with The Guardian, Damore said that he was frustrated that he had become associated with the alt-right because of the memo. “Journalists and commentators were incentivised to distort facts to generate outrage,” he said in the interview.

External References

The Department of Labor accuses Google of gender pay discrimination, The Atlantic

Google on anti-diversity manifesto: Employees ‘must feel safe sharing their opinions,’ Motherboard

Google’s new diversity chief tasked with moving the needle, USA Today

Exclusive: Here’s the full 10-page anti-diversity screed circulating internally at Google, Gizmodo

Internal reactions to Google employee’s manifesto show anti-diversity views have support, Motherboard

Internal messages how some Googlers supported fired engineer’s manifesto, Wired

Segregated valley: the ugly truth about Google and diversity in tech, The Guardian

Why I was fired by Google, The Wall Street Journal

‘I’m not a sexist: Fired Google engineer stands behind controversial memo, The Washington Post

The engineer Google fired over diversity memo has filed a complaint with federal labor officials, Business Insider

The Google employee who wrote the controversial Google manifesto was fired after CEO Sindar Pichai called it ‘not OK,” Business Insider

‘I see things differently’: James Damore on his autism and the Google memo, The Guardian

James Damore case could spawn more legal headaches for Google, Wired

Prepared by Graham Piro ‘18

December 1, 2017

Religious monument at Arkansas State Capitol destroyed – June 2017

Little Rock, AR

Michael T. Reed drove his car through a large stone monument of the Ten Commandments located in front of the Arkansas State Capitol at 4:47 am on Wednesday, June 28th. He was arrested outside the building and charged with criminal trespass, first-degree criminal mischief, and defacing objects of public interest.

Key Players
Michael T. Reed is a 32-year-old man who was arrested for driving his car through the monument. He was involved a previous incident involving a monument outside the Oklahoma State Capitol in 2014.

Jason Rapert is a Republican Arkansas state senator who originally led the movement to have the monument displayed outside the state capitol. The Washington Post reported that he said a replacement monument had been ordered shortly after Reed destroyed it.

Further Details

On October 24, 2014, Reed was arrested in Tulsa, Oklahoma, for ramming his truck into a similar monument at the Oklahoma State Capitol. ABC8 Tulsa reported that he was “charged with destruction of state property / improvements, indecent exposure, making threatening statements, reckless driving, and operating a vehicle while license revoked.” He was also charged with four counts of felony assault and battery with a dangerous weapon for his actions during his detention by police. Reuters reported that after the incident, Reed ran into a nearby federal building where he made threats against President Obama before he was arrested. Tulsa World reported that after that incident, Reed was sent to Norman’s Griffin Memorial Hospital as part of an agreement with Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater. There, he received therapy, and was diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder. On June 30, 2015, the Oklahoma State Supreme Court ordered that the Ten Commandments monument on display in Tulsa be removed.

Little Rock Patch reported that Reed was streaming the Little Rock incident on Facebook live as he drove his car into the monument at a speed of more than 20 mph. He reportedly shouted, “Oh my goodness. Freedom!” on the broadcast.

Trent Garner, a Republican Arkansas state senator, tweeted after the incident, “We will rebuild. In fact, we should build the monument bigger and higher to show that we will not be intimidated.”

The Washington Post reported that a 2015 law was passed in Arkansas requiring the state government to allow the display of the monument outside the capitol. The article also stated that groups criticized the monument as a violation of the separation of church and state.

Outcome

Reed taken into custody, replacement ordered for destroyed monument

The Washington Post reported that State Senator Rapert said a replacement monument was ordered for the Arkansas State Capitol after Reed drove his car into the original one and destroyed it.

External References

Letter from many who destroyed Ten Commandments monument gives insight into his illness, Tulsa World

Man smashes Arkansas Capitol’s new Ten Commandments monument, Reuters

Driver Arrested After Running Over Ten Commandments Monument, ABC8 Tulsa

Michael Tate Reed: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know, Heavy

Arkansas 10 Commandments Monument Destroyed On Facebook Live: ‘FREEDOM!’”

Oklahoma’s Ten Commandments statue must be removed, state supreme court says, The Washington Post

Why one man keeps ramming his car into Ten Commandments statues on government property, The Washington Post

Arkansas’ Ten Commandments Monument Lasted Less Than 24 Hours, NPR

Prepared by Graham Piro ‘18

October 24, 2017