ACLU Files Lawsuit Against Mayor And Police Officers Who Shut Down Parody Twitter Account, Arrested Its Owner
from the the-streisand-school-of-reputation-management dept
Sue 'em if they can't take a joke.Well, sue 'em if they can't take a joke and go so far as to raid your house, seize your electronics and abuse a law that contains no provision for impersonating someone via electronic means, in order to show you how much they aren't laughing.
As was noted earlier, the ACLU is representing Jon Daniel, the Peoria native behind a Twitter account that parodied Mayor Jim "Trill As Fuck" Ardis. Ardis was sufficiently offended by the off-color nature of the account that he demanded the local police do something about it. And they were only too happy to comply, rooting around in the local statutes (and throwing in child porn accusations for good measure) until they found something they could use.
It didn't take. Charges were dropped by the District Attorney, and Mayor Ardis was forced to defend himself against angry citizens who had just witnessed the power of government being thoroughly (and pettily) abused. According to Ardis, he had to do this. Until the account was closed, he had no First Amendment rights… at least according to his bizarre rationale.
The ACLU has filed its complaint against the City of Peoria, the mayor, his staff and a handful of law enforcement officials. The lawsuit asks for no specific damages, but one imagines those named are now in the process of nailing down a settlement amount that's affordable without being insulting.
The filing also fills in some more details on the overreach and abuse by these public figures and public servants. One of the more surprising details is just how long the Peoria PD held onto Daniel's cell phone (presumably as evidence of a Twitter account).
Daniel was arrested (at work) on April 15th. Charges were dropped on April 23rd (something Daniel learned from the papers, rather than from the city itself). That day, he visited the police department to get his phone back. The police refused. Daniel's lawyer sent a letter the next day demanding the release of Daniel's phone. It took all the way until May 2nd for the PPD to return property it never should have had in the first place.
Equally as surprising was how many warrants were crafted and served over a parodic Twitter account. In addition to the warrant served Twitter, the PPD also served one to Comcast. It obtained warrants to search his residence and cell phone. (Presumably, warrants were in the works for the electronics seized during the four-officer raid of the Twitter parody account's "headquarters" -- i.e., Daniel's home.) According to the filing, the PPD was also working on a warrant to serve to Google to access Daniel's email account. All of this over a Twitter account that was shut down by Twitter on March 20th after verifying that Mayor Jim Ardis was not behind it.
There's nothing in here that wasn't done out of sheer vindictiveness. Once the account was closed, Ardis was free to create an official account for the mayor's office. But he didn't. Instead, he worked closely with Peoria Police for more than a month to ensure the account's creator was punished. Now, he and his office, along with every law enforcement member involved, are being sued for violating Daniel's rights. I'm sure this isn't playing out exactly how Ardis envisioned it. Instead of "protecting" his reputation, he's completely destroyed it, doing more damage than a profane parody account (or twelve...) could ever do.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: free speech, jim ardis, jon daniel, parody, peoria, peoria police
Companies: aclu
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
here's the Urban Dictionary:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Trill
An adjective used in hip-hop culture to describe someone who is considered to be well respected, coming from a combination of the words "true" and "real".
So... Mayor Ardis is stating his street bonafides.
(I realize this answer will probably raise even more questions. My apologies in advance.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cell Phone
Daniel was arrested (at work) on April 15th.
So at this time, the police had obtained evidence.
Charges were dropped on April 23rd (something Daniel learned from the papers, rather than from the city itself)
The police were clearly too busy at this time defending themselves from the crapstorm they created arresting him to return any property.
That day, he visited the police department to get his phone back. The police refused.
Still too busy with the stupid public causing problems and media attention. Plus, they had loaned it out to an officer that needed to take a few selfies and post them on Facebook.
Daniel's lawyer sent a letter the next day demanding the release of Daniel's phone.
This letter was redirected to an undisclosed NSA location and a listening device enclosed. It took 3 days to arrive.
It took all the way until May 2nd for the PPD to return property it never should have had in the first place
The letter from Daniel's lawyer indicated it was an iPhone. THOSE CAN BE TURNED INTO DEADLY GUNS. So, they had to send the potential deadly weapon to another facility to have it tested and verify it was safe. Oh, the NSA intercepted it while it was being sent as well.
So, this was pretty fast, actually.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Settlement suggestion
- Terminate the involved officers For Cause.
- Fire the mayor and have him promise never to run for public office. (If there is no statute on the books that would permit the mayor to be terminated, don't worry. Clearly neither he nor the police really care what the law says, so just be sure he signs in the settlement not to contest the termination.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Settlement suggestion
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Made me think of Austin Powers.
Dr Evil in his volcanic island lair...
the Secretary General of the UN on the big viewer..
UN Sec Gen- "What do you want Dr. Evil? Name an amunt that's affordable without being insulting."
Dr. Evil- "One MILLION dollars!"
UN Sec Gen- with everyone else laughing behind him... "That's all? One Million, you sure have been gone for a long time Dr. Evil...."
They still don't get it do they?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
at least under New York law, the arrest was valid
http://raphaelgolbtrial.wordpress.com/
Despite being widely reported on in the press, the case has been ignored by nearly every legal commentator in the country, so it's not at all surprising that the police now feel free to go after the creators of Twitter accounts embarrassing to wealthy and powerful members of the community, whether they be politicians, university presidents, or anyone else ordinary people might choose to mimic and mock on the Internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's wishing the ACLU *could* sue them
The officers and the mayor will lay low while the case is in litigation because, "We can't discuss a case in litigation."
After a three year battle, the taxpayers will lose with a huge settlement being made to the victim. The settlement will include an agreement that the city, the mayor, and the officers "admit no wrongdoing".
Then the mayor will hold a press conference in which he bemoans our litigious society, and how people like Mr. Daniel get rich at taxpayer expense. Media bobble-heads will bobble and repeat his statements verbatim, and somehow will neglect to mention the mayor was ever in the wrong.
Then, when someone else criticizes the mayor, he'll do the same all over, perhaps with variations. Nothing changes, except the taxpayers get their wealth handed over to the victims of the mayor's abuses.
So it goes, with our "representatives" and public "servants" doing whatever they want, because there is no penalty for them.
So how could it change? Instead of these endless, ineffective civil lawsuits, we need to start filing criminal charges against these jerks. It gets you less money, but watching them try to stay out of jail would at least be much more entertaining. And, maybe...just maybe...they would think twice the next time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Here's wishing the ACLU *could* sue them
OTOH, the taxpayers SHOULD be the ones who pay. They elected this bozo, they are currently failing to remove him, they don't even care enough to mobilize any real protest. The taxpayers are absolutely responsible, they absolutely should be the ones who get screwed by any settlement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Here's wishing the ACLU *could* sue them
I know society really sucks as far as the whole 'personal responsibility' thing goes, but what exactly is it about public officials and police that makes them so untouchable, so immune from criticism and punishment, that the blame and punishment always needs to be shunted off to the public, leaving those actually responsible untouched?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Here's wishing the ACLU *could* sue them
I don't think anyone is. However when it comes to things like this, there are a number of factors that make direct punishment in this sort of thing problematic and often very unwise.
Besides, the problem isn't those particular people. The problem is that the system hires those types of people. Fining them directly won't change the agency's hiring practice or standard of conduct.
The taxpayers (us) are the ultimate bosses. That taxpayers get stung when our employees misbehave is logical and a good thing. It makes us actually care and, maybe, start doing our job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Here's wishing the ACLU *could* sue them
So two-tier 'justice' then, where if I do X, I get punishment X, but if someone in authority does X, they might get punished, but it's likely to be significantly watered down or have the punishment transferred to someone else.
Oh yeah, justice at it's finest. /s
Besides, the problem isn't those particular people.
Did they do what they were accused of? Then yes, at least in this case they are the primary problem.
The problem is that the system hires those types of people.
Hires them and then makes it impossible to hold them accountable for their actions like a regular person would be, allowing them to do as they please, knowing that even if they get caught someone else will be footing the bill.
Fining them directly won't change the agency's hiring practice or standard of conduct.
I disagree, it may not change the 'hiring practices', but if people like that, no matter the position, knew that they would be held personally responsible for their actions, and couldn't just leave the public with the bill, you can bet their 'standards of conduct' would see a pretty significant change.
It makes us actually care and, maybe, start doing our job.
The first step of which should be holding the guilty parties responsible for their actions.
Look, I agree that people holding public office, or 'serving the public' like the police ideally answer to the public, but I fail to see how that absolves those same people from being held accountable for the actions, why they should get away without a scratch and all the blame and punishment should be placed instead on the public, as if they should have known beforehand what the 'public servants' were going to do, and therefor shoulder the blame for not stopping it, rather than the blame and punishment landing on the ones who committed the actions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'affordable?' I certainly hope not!
>>nailing down a settlement amount that's affordable without
>>being insulting.
I hope that the court laughs in the face of any 'affordable' amount. These people abused their authority in a manner that should be criminal, if it isn't already. They abused the trust that the public put in them. And they trashed the town's legal process.
I am sensitive to today's economic struggles, but some people beg for punishment. I do hope that all involved lose jobs, homes, and any monetary accounts. Not only that, but I hope that any of the mayor's offspring are so ashamed to be associated with such a piece of filth that they change their last names.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]