home

Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Protest Tapes


(National Lawyers Guild Photo)

A federal judge in San Francisco has jailed blogger-journalist Josh Wolf, age 24, for refusing to turn over videotapes he took at an anti-capitalist protest last year and to testify before the grand jury.

The protest, tied to a Group of 8 meeting of world economic leaders in Scotland, ended in a clash between demonstrators and the San Francisco police, with one officer sustaining a fractured skull. A smoke bomb or a firework was also put under a police car, and investigators are looking into whether arson was attempted on a government-financed vehicle.

....Mr. Wolf, who posted some of the edited video on his Web site, and sold some of it to local television stations, met with investigators, who wanted to see the raw video. But Mr. Wolf refused to hand over the tapes, arguing that he had the right as a journalist to shield his sources.

A portion of the video is posted here. The San Francisco Chronicle has a more detailed article here. Josh Wolf's mom is posting on his blog .

Hi, I'm Liz Wolf-Spada, Josh's mom. Although the July 20th hearing seemed promising, today the judge, Judge Alsop ruled against all motions including 5th amendment rights, rights coming under freedom of the press, against bail or a stay. Josh is in Dublin federal prison, in the East Bay area of the San Francisco Bay. I don't have any other information at this time, but his lawyer is planning to file an appeal to the federal 9th circuit court. That filing alone costs almost $500, so if you can donate any little bit helps with the expenses of legal counsel and money for Josh while in jail. If you believe in prayer or good thoughts please send them to Josh. Thanks, Liz.

You can read more about the case in Josh's motion for bond pending appeal (pdf). The Government's motion to hold him in contempt is here. (pdf).

The ACLU filed this amicus brief (pdf) for Josh. The Government filed this response on July 31, the day before the hearing.

< Late Night Music: Heat Wave | Good Samaritan Migrant Aid Workers Arrested >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Even assuming that there is some kind of privilege protecting reporters from having to disclose confidential sources, its's hard to see how this applies to a reporter's videotape of a riot, or to interviews of sources who agreed to be videtaped . . .

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#2)
    by Sailor on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 06:59:52 AM EST
    Trying to burn a police car would constitute a federal crime, federal authorities argued, because the Police Department receives money from Washington.
    well, now everything is a federal crime by that reasoning.
    Citing the secrecy of grand jury proceedings, federal prosecutors have never explained their interest in the possible burning of a police car, which local authorities typically would investigate. No local charges have ever been filed in connection with that incident.
    It seems theh feds are only pursuing this to stifle dissent. It'd be interesting to see whether these protesters were led by undercover cops like the ones in Oakland.
    Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Finigan argued -- and Alsup agreed -- that private citizens have no right to enforce the guidelines.
    Seems he was acting as a journalist, not a 'private citizen.'

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#3)
    by legion on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 07:15:26 AM EST
    Seems he was acting as a journalist, not a 'private citizen.'
    True, and normally I'd be with him, but I didn't think "source privacy" applied to collective groups filmed during public activity; only individuals giving private interviews. Makes me wonder what exactly is on that 'raw footage' they're asking for...

    The Bush administration has argued that reporters are adequately protected by Justice Department guidelines, which state that subpoenas against journalists must be approved by the attorney general and should be issued only after prosecutors have pursued other sources of information. But when Wolf's lawyer said the government had failed to show that it followed those standards in his case, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Finigan argued -- and Alsup agreed -- that private citizens have no right to enforce the guidelines.
    What good are "guidelines" that citizens have no right to enforce? Is this some kind of cruel joke? I agree: there is more going on here than meets the eye. The feds don't normally investigate a case of "attempted arson" of a police car. My guess is the shots of those officers with a suspect in a choke hold would "go missing" if Josh' turned the tapes over. Good on him.

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#5)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 08:24:55 AM EST
    Nothing to worry about. The 9th will cut him free and it will be on to the SC, which will reverse the 9th. Can anyone tell me why freedom of the press can be construed to allow withholding innformtion of a crime, and refusal to testify to a GJ? I would say they should keep him locked up through the appeals process but I am trying to project a kinder, gentler image. BTW - Wonder what would happen if he were in Cuba? ....and please... don't reply to this certifable off topic remark... Because you know the answer...

    I know this judge, Bill Alsup. I worked for him when he was in private practice. As a summer associate, I participated in a Yosmite death march he lead on Fourth of July and rode back with him to the Bay Area. He's very liberal. He clerked for Justice Douglas and helped write Douglas's "Trees Should Have Standing" dissent in Sierra Club v. Morton. And boy does he believe that. Liberality aside, Bill Alsup believes in following the law as he sees it and he can be harsh.

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#7)
    by Sailor on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 08:42:10 AM EST
    BTW - Wonder what would happen if he were in Cuba? ....and please... don't reply to this certifable off topic remark... Because you know the answer...
    Try to stay on topic for a change.

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#8)
    by Patrick on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 08:58:18 AM EST
    Let's leave out the fact that this self-proclaimed anarchist has his mommy blogging for him in his absence, my question is since he claims to be an anarchist was he a participant in the "protest" where a police officer sufferred a skull fracture or was he there covering it? I don't see a legitimate journalist refusing to turn over video-tape, which can be easily duplicated if he fears some nefarious intent on the part of the authorities.

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#9)
    by Gabriel Malor on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 09:04:26 AM EST
    Patrick, I agree. Journalist privilege exists to protect sourses, not journalists. It doesn't appear from the information that was provided that the video contains any sources at all. Rather, it appears that the video merely documented the events of a specific day. Wolf has no privilege with regard to that.

    This is about the unpublished material akin to a reporters notes. Where I think he'll lose is that the event was held in public and he isn't protecting any individual as a source of his reporting. My guess is that he isn't doing this out of any great love of the consitution since he is an avowed anarchist. He is either doing this to make some larger point (America is bad, Bush is bad, capitalism is bad, etc..., or to gain fame and/or become a martyr. His actions make no sense otherwise.

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#11)
    by Gabriel Malor on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 10:20:27 AM EST
    bocajeff, actually I think the whole reason the investigators want the video is because it might contain incriminating evidence with regard to the riot and the smoke bomb. Wolf may be refusing because he knows very well that such incriminating evidence does, in fact, exist on the video and he wishes to protect his police-attacking anarchist buddies.

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#12)
    by Sailor on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 10:29:59 AM EST
    I think the whole reason the investigators want the video is because it might contain incriminating evidence
    Since they don't know what's on it, it sounds like a fishing expedition. And once again, the feds pursuing an attempted arson on a police car while the locals aren't doesn't pass the smell test.

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#13)
    by Gabriel Malor on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 11:14:29 AM EST
    Since they don't know what's on it, it sounds like a fishing expedition.
    Welcome to discovery in this country. Also, how are they ever to know what's on the tape until it's turned over? The same applies to most discovery requests.

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#14)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 01:14:59 PM EST
    Sailor - Then why did you reply? Take some of your own medicene.

    Legal or not, it's his civic duty to help out if possible, with an investigation.

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#16)
    by Sailor on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 03:58:38 PM EST
    Legal or not, it's his civic duty to help out if possible, with an investigation.
    Uhh, no.
    Also, how are they ever to know what's on the tape until it's turned over?
    They don't even know whether a crime took place or not. To wit:
    A smoke bomb or a firework was also put under a police car, and investigators are looking into whether arson was attempted on a government-financed vehicle.
    They obviously have an agenda that differs from what they are claiming. Personally, I think it is to stifle dissent, especially since bushco has a history of doing that. ppj, please try to stay on topic.

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#17)
    by jimcee on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 04:19:04 PM EST
    I would think that he would be a man and stay in prison for his beliefs, heck that skinny little social x-ray Judith Miller had more balls than this little sniveling anarchist mama's boy. I would guess that he is trying to polish his Lefty creds or he is covering for friends of his that participated in the situation that he taped. Buck up anarchy boy you want anarchy you've got it in prison. Actually I'd lay the blame on the NYTimes' insistence that a special prosecutor be installed to investigate the Valerie Plame kerfuffle. When they lost the non-disclosure argument it emboldened the Feds to move on other 'journalists'. Nice job, Grey Lady .

    BTW - Wonder what would happen if he were in Kazakhstan? ....and please... don't reply to this certifable off topic remark... Because you know the answer...


    Making money from an anti-capitalist rally! That is american enterprise for you! Go Josh, go. Find yourself a tax shelter for the cash!

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#20)
    by jimcee on Wed Aug 02, 2006 at 05:17:11 PM EST
    Wiley, Very good point and one that exposes this fellow for the hypocrite that he is.

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#21)
    by kdog on Thu Aug 03, 2006 at 11:54:21 AM EST
    Seems to me his videotape is his private property...why should he have to turn it over to the feds?

    Re: Blogger Jailed for Refusing to Turn Over Prote (none / 0) (#22)
    by Sailor on Mon Aug 07, 2006 at 08:10:02 AM EST
    Wolf's defense lawyer, Jose Luis Fuentes, said jail officials blocked him from seeing his client until Saturday, five days after his incarceration. Wolf remains steadfast in refusing to surrender the footage, Fuentes said.

    "It smells and appears to be punishment, which is not what the civil contempt order is about -- it's about coercion," he said. "If he can't make phone calls to his mother or have visits from his mother, and he is denied visits from his attorney, it would seem that's all punishment."


    SITE VIOLATOR (none / 0) (#24)
    by Peter G on Thu Sep 13, 2018 at 08:54:19 AM EST