Judge Rejects 'Rioting' Charge Against Journalist For Reporting On Protestors, But Prosecutor Still Looking For New Charges
from the good-to-see dept
Last week it was announced that journalist Amy Goodman would go to North Dakota to face charges over her coverage of North Dakota oil pipeline protests that went viral. The idea that Goodman was charged with doing journalism was really ridiculous. The original charges focused on "trespassing" but once the local state's attorney, Ladd Erickson, realized that those clearly would not stick, he changed them to rioting. When asked to defend the arrest warrant and charges by a local newspaper, Erickson displayed a complete lack of understanding of the First Amendment in saying that because Goodman's coverage was sympathetic to the protesters, it was fine to consider her a protester too.Thankfully, a judge disagreed and rejected the rioting charge.
District Judge John Grinsteiner did not find probable cause to justify the charges filed on Friday October 14 by State’s Attorney Ladd R. Erickson. Those charges were presented after Erickson had withdrawn an earlier charge against Goodman of criminal trespass.Bizarrely, it appears Erickson is planning to hit the law books to see if there's anything else he can find to charge Goodman:
She and her lawyers declared victory on Monday, but Ladd Erickson, a state prosecutor who is assisting the Morton County state’s attorney’s office in the case, said other charges were possible.That alone just seems like more intimidation -- planning to look at "unedited and unpublished videos" to try to find something to charge Goodman over. This is just blatant intimidation of the press, basically trying to get info on sources.
“I believe they want to keep the investigation open and see if there is any evidence in the unedited and unpublished videos that we could better detail in an affidavit for the judge,” he said via email. “The Democracy Now video that many people have seen doesn’t have much evidence value in it.”
Of course, if the goal was to intimidate Goodman away from reporting on the protests, it appears to have failed. Goodman has pledged to continue to cover the story. The question remaining, though, is if Erickson gets any reprimand for clearly violating the constitutional rights of journalists? It remains deeply problematic that the charges and arrest warrant were ever issued in the first place.
Meanwhile, a documentary filmmaker, Deia Schlosberg, who was also in North Dakota filming protesters was also arrested and has been charged with a series of felony charges including "theft of property, conspiracy to theft of services and conspiracy to tampering with or damaging a public service." So, apparently Goodman isn't the only one targeted for doing First Amendment protected work in covering the stories of protesters.
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: amy goodman, journalism, ladd erickson, north dakota, protests, rioting
Reader Comments
The First Word
“Thanks Ladd Erickson
Thanks Ladd Erickson, without your moronic action I would have never known about this important pipeline issue in North Dakota.I will be sure to seek out additional coverage of this topic and look forward to seeing what your next moronic action will be.
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Wrong State
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thanks Ladd Erickson
I will be sure to seek out additional coverage of this topic and look forward to seeing what your next moronic action will be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There's a rule for that:
you better keep your mouth shut"
I guess Erickson doesn't know that one...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There's a rule for that:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: There's a rule for that:
You assume he doesn't know he is wrong. He may know and simply not care. Even if he is sued for "malicious prosecution", it is his office that is sued (he's protected personally) and, at worst, tax payers have to pay a bill if he loses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: There's a rule for that:
Sounds like a good way to avoid personal responsibility and allow petty tyrants to reign freely.
No one should be above the law--including attorneys and other government lawyers. Otherwise more will cross the line which separates PROsecution from PERsecution with impunity
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Napoleonic Code
It's part of the Napoleonic Code: The emperor is subject to the same laws that is the lowest civilian.
Sadly, as with our practice of prosecutorial discretion we don't believe in that here in the states.
Also corporations are treated very differently, despite being regarding as people, instead they're fined and insufficiently so, for wrongdoing. So a company has very little reason to change its policies if the legal costs are less than the benefits of the policy.
Ergo, Exxon-Valdez, Deepwater Horizon...and possibly Trump, if he's found some clever way to prevent DAs from prosecuting him directly, instead prosecuting Trump, Inc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Grandstanding or Stupid?
As nearly as I can tell, both were last elected in 2010 and are not due to stand for re-election until 2018.
I guess they are that stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Grandstanding or Stupid?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Grandstanding or Stupid?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Grandstanding or Stupid?
probably just the belief that they can do whatever they want because they won't be held accountable? When someone does something they do not like, laws be damned they will go out of their way to make an example of whoever dared to go against those in charge.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Grandstanding or Stupid?
Well... There is a certain cast of mind, that somehow doesn't quite understand the difference between 'prosecutor' and 'persecutor'...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Or perhaps in this case they will also charge her with "resisting charges" or "violating your own right to remain silent."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ladd Erickson, don't limit yourself, think outside the box
I understand you are looking for evidence in unedited and unpublished videos in order to charge Amy Goodman for her brazen and willful acts of journalism.
Why are you limiting yourself to unedited videos? Why not edited videos as well?
What about videos with special effects added? Digitally enhanced?
Thank you for your ongoing efforts to protect us all from news and information that we should not be aware of. Government censorship and abuse of power to intimidate journalists is a time honored practice in history. The first amendment should never stand in the way of your passion and zeal.
Sincerely,
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"BASHIR: ... The problem with Cardassian enigma tales is that they all end the same way. All the suspects are always guilty.
GARAK: Yes, but the challenge is determining exactly who is guilty of what. ... "
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What about practicing witchcraft?
Throw her in the water, see if she floats.
If that doesn't work, maybe charge her with corrupting the youth?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about practicing witchcraft?
How about communism since the media is ramping up going to war with russia.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What about practicing witchcraft?
Reds doing yellow journalism is the new orange?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What about practicing witchcraft?
Russia isn't trying to be communist anymore.
Is containment of Soviet expansionism still an active US policy? That would be telling if it was.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bizarrely? Really? Aren't we seeing this happening systematically for years now to consider it bizarre or abnormal? Throwing the book to see if anything sticks and threaten maximum jail time is the norm. Remember Aaron? He was just one drop in the ocean that was noticed because unfortunately he ended his life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Erickson to attempt learning through osmosis???
I say this because Erickson has to know that the North Dakota statutes do not come in audio-book format.
It seems apparent to me that he has to be illiterate, or else he would have already known that the bill of rights trumps any local laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: the irony is...
Rekrul, I just got done early voting here in Albuquerque. I should have read the long ballot before hand! However, the process was quick, but people are waiting until election day maybe. On the ballot was a question that went like, should citizens of the city have the right to vote on whether or not [a big transit project destroying travel on a major city avenue] should be allowed? So it was as though we might get to have a say... on something the mayor started work on yesterday. Actually he is doing no work himself, no shovel in his hand, and I'm sure he never takes any bus anywhere in the city. It doesn't matter that I don't think the US Govt has actually given the city the funding yet, though the mayor's contractor buddies may not get their cut, so local taxpayers will probably have to make up for it. At least, should the mayor decide to run for some other office, it is highly unlikely he will succeed as people will remember his giant ego and the even bigger traffic jams, all for a "service" no one wants or needs. No amount of citizen protests of the whole idea were listened to by "leaders/city fathers" who think they have a brilliant idea and everyone will (or better) learn to love it. This happens everywhere, all around the world, so you are right to point out the irony that protesting is useless if TPTB think they are right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's not forget what Deia Schlosberg was charged for.
compounds and started spinning valves. This could have
resulted in one or more major pipeline breaks and spills.
Put as simply as possible, she was acting as publicist and
videographer for an actual crime in progress. It doesn't
matter that she claimed to be "doing journalism" because her
active participation in that crime [by riding along and not
notifying police of the crime in progress] makes her a
direct participant in the crimes she filmed.
She has no defense because she joined that group as a
willing criminal and failed to act otherwise at any point.
Amy, on the other hand [and even though she was obviously
on the side of the protesters], did no such thing and
simply acted as a legitimate journalist at all times.
The prosecutor's actions beyond this point are more likely to
get him in trouble with the courts than do harm to Amy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's not forget what Deia Schlosberg was charged for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not quite. There's a critical difference which the court will address.
co-conspirators. Take, for example, the journalists who
rode along with the Marines when they were fighting in
Fallujah. One of those marines found a wounded insurgent
trying to play dead and executed him. Only the presence
of that journalist and his camera caused the crime to be
uncovered and the footage secured a conviction.
Certainly, some embedded journalists are unabashed cheerleaders
but even those ones tend to do their job first as professionals;
never really becoming combatants themselves.
Deia Schlosberg chose to be a participant in the crime, for
which her camera was the instrument of her activism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So. I suppose everyone should stop by a police station once a year and hand over everything they own so the fuzz can go through all of it to see if they can charge you with anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This annoys me. Every time someone does something someone in government doesn't like, they arrest them and THEN go looking for a charge to place. They invariably say that they KNOW they broke a law, but they just don't know what one.
I am of the opinion that unless you KNOW they broke a law, you shouldn't be able to do anything to someone. And if the charge is false (such as rioting, for covering a protest) then let that play out in court or the charge dropped.
It's an abuse of law if you go hunting for 100+ year old laws that haven't been enforced or even LOOKED AT for decades just to punish someone you don't like.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re: fishing around some other charge to trump on her...
They can do that?
Does anyone else see the big obvious problem with that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Democracy Now
Wonder how much traffic he has driven to
http://www.democracynow.org/
That would be a double Streisand
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Picking Sides
What concerns me is not that a journalist might be sympathetic with one side or the other:
"because Goodman's coverage was sympathetic to the protesters, it was fine to consider her a protester too. "
...but rather that our government and law enforcement, in the form of Ladd Erickson and the police, would take one side or the other.
Her job is to report the situation to the public, which she is clearly doing, whether biased or not. Law enforcement's job should be to keep the peace as the protesters demonstrate, and make sure innocent citizens and journalists remains safe, even if the protesters or pipeline security detail break laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CROSSING THE LINE
It appears that a charge of CRIMINAL HARASSMENT is in order!... and, a RESTRAINING ORDER! And it would be important to establish whether there was any "UNDUE INFLUENCE' exerted against Erickson by OIL INTERESTS, in order to remove any criticism of the pipeline! Maybe the ACLU can investigate! .. Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CROSSING THE LINE 2
It appears that a charge of CRIMINAL HARASSMENT is in order!... and, a RESTRAINING ORDER! And it would be important to establish whether there was any "UNDUE INFLUENCE' exerted against Erickson by OIL INTERESTS, in order to remove any criticism of the pipeline! Maybe the ACLU can investigate!
Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CROSSING THE LINE 3
It appears that a charge of CRIMINAL HARASSMENT is in order!... and, a RESTRAINING ORDER! And it would be important to establish whether there was any "UNDUE INFLUENCE' exerted against Erickson by OIL INTERESTS, in order to remove any criticism of the pipeline! Maybe the ACLU can investigate!
Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CROSSING THE LINE 4
Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CROSSING THE LINE 5
It appears that a charge of CRIMINAL HARASSMENT is in order!... and, a RESTRAINING ORDER! And it would be important to establish whether there was any "UNDUE INFLUENCE' exerted against Erickson by OIL INTERESTS, in order to remove any criticism of the pipeline! Maybe the ACLU can investigate! --
Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: CROSSING THE LINE 5
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: CROSSING THE LINE 5
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: CROSSING THE LINE 5
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: CROSSING THE LINE 5
_____
Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: CROSSING THE LINE 5
_____
Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: CROSSING THE LINE 5
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: CROSSING THE LINE 5
.
Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: CROSSING THE LINE 5
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: CROSSING THE LINE 5
.
Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
meh....she could give an coulter a run for her money. cant say if they found something that sticked i would feel too bad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You should, because while they may be going after someone you don't care for this time around nothing stops them from doing the same to someone you might agree with next time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]