Appeals Court: Not A Crime To Say A Mayor Should Get His Ass Capped
from the especially-when-no-one-seems-to-know-what-exactly-that-means dept
Harassment statutes tend to be broadly written and often undergo legislative surgery after they've been challenged in court. This isn't one of those cases. The statute stands. But the conviction does not.
A New Jersey man was arrested and charged with harassment after his handwritten criticism of the Secaucus mayor was discovered and brought to the attention of the mayor, who then had to ask his daughter what the note meant.
Here's a brief summary of the alleged crime from Keldy Ortiz of NorthJersey.com.
The arrest came after [Michael] West put a sign on a locked fence on the end of Farm Road in Secaucus that read “the mayor is out of control with his draconian rules & somebody must cap his ass.” The note was found by a department of public works employee.
West had a reason for doing this:
The sign from West came after he took issue with a tree that was cut down in town.
Most people know what having your ass capped means. Most people do. Michael West claimed he didn't know what that phrase meant when he wrote it. More importantly, Mayor Michael Gonnelli didn't know what the phrase meant. Not only was the note placed somewhere the mayor was unlikely to discover it, the note was discovered by a third party who informed the mayor of its existence.
The decision [PDF] recounts what took place once the mayor took possession of the indecipherable note.
The Mayor took the note and brought it back to his home but, at that time, he did not "realize what the note meant." His wife was equally mystified. However, when he showed the note to his daughter, she "immediately told [him] what it meant."
It was only after all of this that the mayor decided he felt "uncomfortable" and decided to report it to law enforcement. The defendant spoke in his own defense at the bench trial but that didn't go all that well.
His attorney asked him: "What was the purpose? Why did you . . . put . . . that note there?" The record shows defendant's response consisted of a rambling, nonsensical diatribe in which he alleged to "being watched by two detectives" that were "standing by a rock."
He was also asked about the tree that triggered his angry note writing.
Defendant continued this stream of consciousness with irrational testimony for several transcription pages until the municipal court judge intervened…
The municipal court decided this was still harassment, mainly because of the "cap his ass" phrase. The appellate court disagrees... about a number of things.
First, the court says the municipal court judge should have recused herself since she was the one that approved the arrest warrant for the person whose case she was now trying.
But more to the harassment point, the state failed to prove this was harassment, that the defendant was trying to threaten the mayor, or even that anyone involved knew for sure the phrase "cap his ass" was clearly threatening.
The Mayor was the State's only witness. The Department of Public Works employee who discovered the note and brought it to the Mayor's attention did not testify. The note stated: "the mayor is out of control with the draconian rules & somebody must cap his ass." Both the Mayor and defendant testified that they did not know what the phrase "cap his ass" meant. The Mayor testified that his daughter told him what the phrase meant to her. The State did not produce any competent authority of the meaning of the phrase. It is undisputed that the note was posted at a place unlikely to be discovered by the Mayor. Based on the testimony of the only two witnesses, the meaning of the phrase "cap his ass" remains unsettled.
The defendant claimed he didn't know what "cap his ass" meant. He also posted the sign in a place where it was unlikely to be discovered by its supposed "target." The defendant had not engaged in any previous harassment of the mayor or any other city employees. In fact, there had been no interaction at all between the accused and the man in need of ass capping.
The state appeals court dumps the conviction.
[W]e are satisfied that based on the record before us, no reasonable fact-finder could find defendant guilty of harassment beyond a reasonable doubt.
The mayor remains as safe as he ever was. A note suggesting he would be better suited with a cap in his ass probably just summarized the opinions of his critics in somewhat cruder fashion than they would have chosen to deploy but it's still pretty far from a threat or harassment. A single note hung on the fence across an out-of-the-way road is the least effective harassment ever but it took three courts to finally come to this conclusion.
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, harassment, micael gonnelli, michael west, new jersey, secaucus
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Beware the leopard 🐆
A single note hung on the fence across an out-of-the-way road
The stream-of-consciousness diatribe makes us wonder about some people's mental cap-ass-ity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well duh!
It's like having your teeth capped, right? ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well duh!
Don't forget this ASS CAP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Society_of_Composers,_Authors_and_Publishers
In 2009, Mike Masnik, the founder and CEO of Floor64, accused ASCAP of keeping some royalties instead of passing them on to artists. He claimed ASCAP collects royalties from all sizes of live performance on behalf of all the artists it represents but passes on the royalties only to artists whose music is represented in one of "the top 200 grossing US tours of the year."[41]
In June 2010, ASCAP sent letters to its members soliciting donations to fight entities that support weaker copyright restrictions, such as Public Knowledge, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Creative Commons,[42][43] creating notable controversy as many[44] argued that these licences are a form of copyright and offer the artist an extra choice. Lawrence Lessig, a co-founder of Creative Commons, responded stating that they are not aiming to undermine copyright, and invited ASCAP for a public debate.[45] The offer was turned down by ASCAP's Paul Williams.[46]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Well duh!
It was that statement by ASCAP which made me decide to get my royalties from BMI instead. Going after Creative Commons seems to me to be the exact opposite of representing artists since CC is all voluntary. I was so disgusted that I decided to go with BMI as they seemed like the lesser of two evils. I have no regrets!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You know.. cap.. as in limit.. as in broadband.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
How bad is it that I'm imagining a lipped bung (not the bribery variety) designed for the... erm... posterior orifice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It not bad. It normal.
Many Lots of women your age have dese feeling. Many books write about it.
I here to listen you about butt plugs.
[lights candle, runs bath]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Not my thing, mate, but thanks anyway.
[Backs away slowly, turns around and runs away]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
lol. lipped bung
Wow, you do have a sense of humor after all. And here I thought I would get flamed for speaking pidgin dialect.
“Flavio hatezez all de Joos, and brown, an black and purple peeples!!”
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's incitement to violence. If you said that about the President, you'd get a visit from the secret service, at a minimum. If the President said that about someone, you can bet someone would fulfill his desire.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_no_one_rid_me_of_this_turbulent_priest%3F
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If Alex Jones can't be charged with incitement to violence for the things he's said to millions of internet followers, which actually resulted in those followers sending threats and harassment to people, I highly doubt that a handwritten sign hung up on a dirt lot next to the Hackensack river, which incited exactly zero acts of violence or harassment (except, perhaps, against the author), would count.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
... you mean, like... "Try not to hurt him. If you do, I'll defend you in court, don't worry about it."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Perhaps so, but the state tried it as harassment, not incitement. To count as harassment, they apparently needed to show that the target reasonably should have felt threatened. Since the target is on record as not understanding the statement, and apparently had made no affirmative effort to understand it after the public works employee delivered it (instead, the daughter volunteered an interpretation when she saw the statement - no indication he thought to go ask her input) and the statement was in a place unlikely to be discovered by the target, it's pretty hard to see how the target could feel threatened, even if we assume that the speaker was lying in court and did understand the statement to be inciting/threatening. If the state wanted a win, then it really should have pursued this as an incitement charge. That probably would have been easier to win and make stick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So the state's view in taking this to trial was political speech is now harassmen?
Let's not give the President any precedent or ideas.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
“It's incitement to violence. If you said that about the President“
And if my aunt had a dick she’d be my uncle bro.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Or your Aunt would be a trans woman
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The president needs a cap in his ass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: President/cap/ass
Trump already has a cap in his ass. I'm pretty sure he was wearing a MAGA cap for his latest rectal-cranial inversion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: President/cap/ass
Trump supporters are the ass cappers.
We are all either armed, locked or loaded.
We like to cap lefty ass while loaded, especially.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: President/cap/ass
Harassment! Yes you are guilty!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: President/cap/ass
We are all either armed, locked or loaded.
You forgot "and geriatric" boomer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
While it might be incitement to violence, that wasn't what the author of the note was charged with. It's certainly NOT harassment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What he really meant by it
"Your Honor, what I thought it meant was, the mayor is an ass hat".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't otherwise know about this mayor or the Tree Incident, but he certainly seems a bit off the hook now, if not out of control.
Probably doesn't need ass-capping, but maybe a grill would do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Power causes brain damage & a desire to use that power in illegal ways aided by other brain damaged power wielders.
Once upon a time they actually feared pissing off citizens, now they just do the bidding of the PAC with the largest war chest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]