Hot News!
• Proportional Representation: Christopher Smitherman v. Jeff Berding
• Portune’s Deal, Unopposed Republican Judges, and the Case for Proportional Representation
Contact Us
v mail, fax: (214) 481-6464
e mail: click here
Events
 |
|
|
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
First court documents from CityBeat v. CCV, Burress, Leis, Streicher,
Posted by Justin Jeffre
What do the following organizations and individuals - which include the Hamilton County sheriff, the Cincinnati police chief, a Cincinnati councilman, some county attorneys, religious leaders including an Episcopal Bishop, anti-porn crusaders, anti-choice activists, and more - have in common?
CITIZENS FOR COMMUNITY VALUES, PHIL BURRESS, GARRY EDMONDSON, SIMON LEIS, CHRIS MONZEL, AARON NEGANGARD, THOMAS H. STREICHER, JR., JUSTIN VERST, REV. JERMAINE ARMOUR, BISHOP E. LYNN BROWN, PAULA BUSSARD, JACKIE CARNEY, PASTOR GREGORY CHANDLER, SR., REV. WAYNE DAVIS, PATTI GARIBAY, SUSAN M. GERTZ, PAM GLENN, REV. AARON GREENLEA, JOSEPH GUBASTA, PhD, MICHAEL HOWARD, BISHOP MAURICE JACKSON, REV. JOEL JAMES, KATHLEEN KEILY, DR. JERRY KIRK, REV. MICHAEL MACK, REV. ALEX McENTIRE, MAJOR KENNETH MAYNOR, REV. JAMES PANKEY, BOBBI RADECK, PASTOR RICHARD A. ROSE, SR., CINNY ROY, RICH SCHATZ, REV. K.Z. SMITH, SCOTT D. STEPHENS, FORD TAYLOR, LORI VIARS, PASTOR CLARENCE WALLACE, PAULA WESTWOOD, BISHOP DWIGHT WILKINS, PASTOR CHARLIE WINBURN
They all signed a June 6, 2008 widely-reported letter to Cincinnati CityBeat publisher John Fox asking him to stop running sex ads.
They’re also all named defendants in a Federal District Court lawsuit filed yesterday on behalf of CityBeat by attorney Jennifer Kinsley at First Amendment defenders Sirkin Pinales & Schwartz LLP.
Here’s the complaint.
Here are the supporting exhibits.
Update: This link includes CCV press releases.
Dig in.
• Share This Article!
Listen to this article
|  |
Register
Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.
If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.
09 Jul 2008 at 09:58 pm | #
Per the lawsuit, Citizens for Community Values (CCV) held a press conference INSIDE Cincinnati City Hall. The fact that the letter to CityBeat was “endorsed” by Councilman Monzel and Police Chief Streicher gave the whole proceeding the color of law. Because the press conference was held inside City Hall, apparently with the approval of the city, and Monzel and Streicher in their official capacities were pressuring CityBeat to stop a lawful First Amendment activity, I can certainly understand that part of the lawsuit.
I am less certain about most of the others named. Do not groups have the right to urge companies to change behavior? Think of examples such as labor rights and pollution. Boycotts are a long-established means of applying pressure for change.
Is it because they allied themselves—whether knowingly or not—with Monzel, Streicher, and CCV in this City Hall press conference that they are being sued?
Part of the problem, too, is that this council is a big believer in selective enforcement of the laws. If they were known to enforce laws equally and not play favorites it wouldn’t bother me to have Monzel sign such a letter. But that is not the case. (I still wouldn’t have Streicher sign the letter. That is too much.)
If someone knows about the First Amendment and how it applies in this area, please comment.
09 Jul 2008 at 11:20 pm | #
I couldn’t find a link to the letter they sent. What I’m curious about is how the elected officials signed the letter; did they include their official government titles? were they dressed in their government garb or wearing their badges?
The sticking point for the city is that they allowed this press conference to be held in their offices.
Generally, people retain their individual rights to free speech but they cannot invoke their office. This is why they are being sued “in their official capacity” and under “colour of office”. ANd I think City Beat’s got them.
However, CCV, unless they can show an actual conspiracy - will escape damages. They will be content to make us taxpayers in the city and the county pay for the mistakes of a handful of idiots that we elected to office.
The tortious interference is beautiful!!!!
I’m not a lawyer, but I think this has more legs than I thought at first blush.
I think everyone should write each of these defendants and ask them to step up to the plate regarding Bill Cunningham and WLW - isn’t racism, sexism, and generally hatred against family values applicable to WLW? Geez, they were promoting strippers and lap dances as a constitutional right, featured pin up girls on their website with links to vulgar sex stories, and make a profit promoting racism. Yet these elected officials regularly appear on the station.
What hypocrits
10 Jul 2008 at 12:31 am | #
The suit is without merit. CCV has a right to criticize CityBeat. CityBeat has a right to criticize CCV. We all have the right to criticize either, neither, or both. The fact is the 1st Amendment means you’re going to hear some things you don’t like. That’s the price of freedom.
10 Jul 2008 at 07:11 am | #
First of all, I find it extremely Ironic that they hold a First Amendment rally on Fountain Square, with the support of Fountain Square Management. They have their own issues regarding the right of allowing free speech on the square.
As to the letter, and why they are suing the City etc etc, why? Did the council pass a law that they could not run these ads? No. Were they ordered, or had their offices raided because of running these ads? No .
It’s a letter asking them to stop, as they feel it is an avenue for illegal activity. So, my question is, why are they suing? Because someone wrote them a little that they feel, in their own words
“The message to us was loud and clear: Stop running all adult-oriented ads or the area’s top cops and prosecutors will come down hard on CityBeat.”
The letter didnt say that, and you and I both know that if the City, or whomever wants to mess with you, they will use other means. Building inspectors and things like that. If the Cincinnati Police are outside their offices writting citbeat employees bogus traffic tickets or something, then that would be something, but they are not, I assume.
May have been the message, but is that what they said ? in Citybeat, it says “
“Apparently this coalition is planning to send us a letter detailing its request.”
It says request. I asked my friend who is up on such things ( you know who ) and she doesn’t understand what it is about. There has been no action, no law or ordinance passed, nobody was arrested or Charged, so on what basis are they suing these people. I don’t agree with this group CCV, but my understanding of the nut that runs it, he controls alot of votes, so I can see why Monzell, Leis, and others singed it. Would it not be their right of free speech to write that letter?
May or may not be an issue for the Police chief to sign it, and to hold it on the steps of City Hall, but I suppose that we would also have the right to hold a news conference on the steps of city hall ( would they let us , probbably not, and THEN there would be the possibility of a suit ) declaring “ Fried Chicken is bad for you” and if memebers of council wanted to sign the letter, why could they not?
This CCV is a far, far right Christian Group, who’s leader the State Attorney’s might want to look at, rather than be pandering for votes. Which is part of it, but I imagine that they have had some issues with the ads actually being part of ads for what is Illegal activity. City Beats says this when they say “ we have co-operated with officials when such ads turned out to be an illegal activity”. It is not CityBeats responsiblity to vet everyones ads. If someone came to them and said, “ we want to buy ads for our call-girl business”, then they would say no, and have no problem. So, as it stands they have a clear position of not knowingly taking illegal ads, so what is their Beef?
Nobody has passed any law telling them they cant run these ads, The Police, or City Attorneys can ask that they don’t, but other than that, all they are doing is giving this crazy group alot of FREE Publicty.
If they have evidenance that they know they are doing something illegal by running these ads, that would be a different story. I imagine there is a Law against knowingly promoting , or aiding and abetting prostitution, but unless they are doing it purposely, and know it, they have no issue.
I read thru it all, and they are not under inestigation, they are not being asked before a grand jury, so until something like that happens, these people are expressing their own right of free speech, and Citybeat is giving them alot of Publicty. I can see the election ads now. “ Cincinnati Councilman Monzell was on the Steps of City hall, fighting prostitution in our city” blah blah blah.
Until they actually tell them NO, you cant do this. no case. What are they doing to stop CityBeat from continuing to run these ads? Expressing their opinion that it contributes to prostitution in our area. Maybe their is something we dont know, but in citybeats own words
“The message to us was loud and clear: Stop running all adult-oriented ads or the area’s top cops and prosecutors will come down hard on CityBeat. “
I am surprised that they would even give this a line in the Citybeat or waste money on an attorney.At least until they actually DID something. Both sides of an issue have the right of free speach under the constitution.
I have learned quite alot about civil rights in my experience with Boy Genius. What happened there is clearly a violation of free speach, and some other things.
I didnt read the CE article, but even if they said we agree in an editoral or an article, they have the same right Citybeat does .
I would say, Dont give this CCV moron and inch of publicity
10 Jul 2008 at 08:04 am | #
I read the lawsuit. Citybeat says that “ they demanded in writting that they stop.....” The letter said “ we REQUEST you stop” They also say “ we the undersigned therefore appeal to your integrity as a corporate citizen and ASK that you eliminate the adult services category and refuse to accept elsewhere for sexual services, in both your print and online editions.”
the end says “thanks for your consideration of our REQUEST and your reply”
Never see the word demand. never see “ if you dont” .Request and demand are 2 different words, and nowhere does it acuse them of any illegal activity.
The complaint says Citybeat seeks monetary damages in the amount of lost revenue and business revenue resulted from Defendants campaign to violate the papers civil rights and tortious interferance with its business relationships as well as declaratory and injunctive relief prohibibiting additional government action that functions as a prior restraint on CityBeats right to free expression and freedom of the press. “
So again, because they write a letter requesting them to stop, they are suing them? Sounds to me like they are a little paranoid that someone is going to pass a law. Is there a part missing here that would be some legislation, or comming ordinance?
The yellow pages should join the suit, as they run ads with titles like “ High Class Outcalls” “ Amber and Asheley companions.
then they say “ CCV is a non-profit grassroots organization of citizens who are concerned for the well-being of the community.... “
They have the right to their views , just as much as Citybeat has the right to print the ads, unless they KNOWINGLY do it with specific information that it is for illegal purposes.
so again, whats the Beef? The should be giiging into Phil Burgess. See how many internet porn sites he is on, or whatever.
Endorsing a letter by any person is also free speech. Doesnt matter if they are the Police Chief, or the paperboy. If the Chief said, do this or we will arrest you’ different story, but as far as I know, and in the complaint , or the letter from CCV, it cites no law or oridance that they are violating.
The ONLY issue I could see is if, an official told people “ you run an ad in Citybeat, we will do something to you”. Or, dont run an ad in Citybeat, or we will give you parking tickets. But this group has the right like anyone else, to have, or organize a boycott against citybeat for running those ads. If people stop ads in city beat because they are running these ads, that’s their right.
Free speach goes both ways. Everyone, has the right to exprese their opinion. Even the Police Chief. The elcted officials, while they may also believe in the doctrine of this group, is probably doing it because they believe, or have had instances where these people at the spas saw an ad. so what? the ads are not illegal, and most likely is the answers, this is the far right christian groups that felx their Political muscle, and delievers and withholds votes. Maybe Citybeat could spend the time and money better by exploring the the Church/political connection, and the Federal law between a non profit church that has a political agenda.
That guy has dirt. Go expose him to the world.
There is no basis to this suit. Nobody has forced anyone to do anything, or not run the ads. You cant sue someone for something they might do in the furture. Like
How they can sue Monzell in his official capacity is interesting. If a Doctor signed it, could they claim malpractice against the Dr?
Slander, maybe they could do something there, as they said basically, citbeat is the conduit to illegal sexually activity. I would say the people who place the ads and got caught were responsible to the crime they got caught for, not Citybeat.
Let me say, I dont at all agree with this group CCV. They are the classic, abusers of religion to force political agendas. Take them down Citybeat. Take a look at Phil. There are things in his closet. Be a better use of your time and money.
Just my opinion.
10 Jul 2008 at 08:31 am | #
Editor & Publisher picked up the story today: http://tinyurl.com/63jp9k
10 Jul 2008 at 10:55 am | #
But where is the pressure? They didnt demand, they requested. The police Chief has the same right of fee speach as this crazy group does.
Mr Bortz wrote the Dean an e-mail calling him an Imbeseal. He wrote it as a councilman.
It looks like the point is that citybeat is trying to start the war against free speech IN CASE the next thing they do is pass a law. As I said, and the link said, the same stuff is in the yellow pages.
It is bad taste to have allowed it to happen on the steps of city hall, and it could give the illusion that it was sanctioned by the city, but techincally, anyone can have a news conference on the steps of City Hall. If the whole city council was there, on the steps, with the mayor, then, one might claim officially sanctioned. But it was a news opp, and these people get or give votes, based on who they back.
there is no violation of free speach here, except the claim they can state thier opinion.
it works both ways.
Borderline slander, but I am sure they had an attorney write it.
First line of the suit, they Demanded. They didnt, they requested. Well gee your honor, we thing requests are demands. dismissed.
they are only giving this guy and getting free press.
10 Jul 2008 at 11:22 am | #
#2 it wasn’t in there offices. It was on the steps of city hall. it was a comcerial for the elections I am sure.
anyone can hold a press conference at city hall, inspite of what they may tell you.
only 2 cincy officials, The Chief, and Monzell, and Hamilton county, Simon.
I bet this Phil guy has 400 memberships on porn sites. call the talk about how bad it is always do.
10 Jul 2008 at 11:40 am | #
Actually, free speech isn’t allowed in many ways for the police chief. city employees can’t express a lot of opinions in their official capacity.
10 Jul 2008 at 01:25 pm | #
I did a little research on this Guy. The far far right courts him. He can bring votes.
If I were citybeat, I would be all over the political nature of these “churches” and their non-profit status. There was a chruch in Nashville. The “ ONE to go to for the powerful and the monied. All the guy did was to tell the congrgation who and how to vote. That is supposed to be immediately addressed concerning a churches non-profit status.
10 Jul 2008 at 01:51 pm | #
Probably no legal problem if CCV or other like-minded anti-porn groups/individuals had sent the letter. But the law enforcement and elected officials like Leis, Streicher, Monzel, and perhaps others on the list change the legal standing. The E&P article’s worth a close read. The mass letter to CityBeat appears to have been intended to intefere with the newspaper’s business and to intimidate the only non-blog media outlet in town which takes on the local powers that be.
From: CityBeat Files Suit to Protect First Amendment Rights by John Fox, July 9, 2008: http://blogs.citybeat.com/porkopolis/2008/07/citybeat-files.html
As many of you know, the people we’re suing held a news conference at Cincinnati City Hall June 9 to announce they wanted CityBeat to stop running adult services advertisements in our paper and on our Web site. This group also delivered a letter that referenced recent prostitution arrests and raids in the Tristate by the Organized Crime Division of the Hamilton County Sheriff’s Department, the Vice Control Section of the Cincinnati Police Department, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Indianapolis and connected them to CityBeat’s adult ads.
The letter claims that CityBeat and citybeat.com “have become primary avenues through which the sex-for-sale industry in greater Cincinnati markets their destructive services.”
The message to us was loud and clear: Stop running all adult-oriented ads or the area’s top cops and prosecutors will come down hard on CityBeat.
The case may generate some lively paperwork from the desks and hard drives of the defendants.
10 Jul 2008 at 04:04 pm | #
Responding to “R,” you got a few points wrong.
1.) The press conference was held inside City Hall, not on the steps outside.
2.) Streicher, Leis and the county prosecutors were acting in their official capacity, not as private citizens, based on the way they signed the letter.
3.) Right-wing groups have used this type of tactic elsewhere (Orlando, I believe) to justify seizing an alt-weekly’s computers, etc., for a “criminal investigation.”
10 Jul 2008 at 06:49 pm | #
Inside, outside, I doubt they would let us but wouldnt we have the right? Is there a law that only certain people can have a news conferance in city hall? That’s a serious question.
Next, did anyone actually sign the letter? All I see is typed names. As far as titles, that’s who they are. If Dr Smtith ‘s name was listed as Dr Smith MD, does that mean he signed it as a medical opinion, or professional capacity?
Believe me, I am no fan of this group.I think this guy is one of those dangerous right wingers. I think they could probably go after him as a story, and find alot of dirt.
But the letter said they “requested “ they stop. The suit said they” Demanded “ that they stop. It was a “do whats good for the community letter, not telling them do this or you will be prosecuted letter. Maybe that’s coming, who knows ?
#9 where are the rules of what an elected, or city official can and cannot say?
I am not saying it’s appropriate at all, but I am looking at it from the lawsuit angle. They could easily say, for instance, here are 500 instances where the spa’s had records of purchasing ads in Citybeat. we found them in the files. Didn’t craigslist go thru this in a couple of places? Maybe the guys at the spa said “ I saw an ad in Citybeat. Is that cause for a warrant? Would a Judge sign that?
Plus, they have numerous disclaimers .
cincinnati.backpage.com is an interactive computer service that enables access by multiple users and should not be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
Plus, in the response Phil says this :
“For CityBeat to suggest that this coalition should not be allowed to make such an appeal is, in itself, an attempt to censor the First Amendment rights of each member of the coalition. “ That’s true, with the exception that the elected officials are not allowed to express their views if that indeed is the case.
Listen I have NO DOUBT that people like Mr Leis could give two craps about anyones rights, and has probably jailed more people for things that did not exist, but I don’t see why the lawsuit. Maybe jumped the gun a little bit? The problem they are going to have is the difference, in which I believe Mr Fox said “ they demanded “. That would be a direct threat. But they didn’t say that, they said “request”, and “consider our request”. Wouldn’t that be free speach also? It works both ways. If you are going to defend free speech, it has to be defended both ways. Nobody likes the Klan message ( well, except the Klan) but courts have made it very clear they have the same rights to say their crap, and the people do to say its crap. That’s the first admendmant .
It would be a big waste of taxpayers money to charge the Citybeat people with anything, unless they have sales meeting that say we need more prostitute revenue, which I doubt exists or was ever said.
I am not defending this whacko. We all know their M.O’s. His whole deal is press, and power to “ fire up the base” and get votes for people. So yes, I understand the right wing. But legal, a threat has to be a threat, and I am not sure that legally, they have a case this is a threat. But all the officials can run ads saying “ Monzell fights against crime” and use this. Not sure when Mr Leis is up for re-election, but he can say the same thing. This is the thing that drives them. Press, and lots of it. It is their drug of choice. I think they would be better served by looking into him and his non-profit. This stuff is his Business. It would be better to nuteralize him with the pen. They are playing his game. I am sure he just loves that they filed the suit, and I am sure he knew they would. Mr Sirkin is a good lawyer, and know this stuff, so maybe it is just protection, but still now they can issue press release after press release to tell the world that they are fighting evil. It fires up the base.
If the Chief of Police and Mr Leis , and Mr Monzell violated some law, then we can all celebrate and people can vote 2 of them out , but my point is that if you argue free speech, they have the right to say what they want, equally . That has been affirmed many times in this city, in the same court. The Klan.
If I were citybeat, I would be looking to see how many of those ads were placed on behalf of CCV or the different agencies. That is a common tatic used by right wingers and agencies. That’s what happened in orlando and other cities.
They are playing his game.
10 Jul 2008 at 09:40 pm | #
There was a similar case last year involving the County Administration Building and the proposed jail tax. Basically there were regulations—not laws—restricting the County Administration Building to official business. A press conference was held there which was pro-jail tax. Some of the opposition to the jail tax sued and won themselves the right to hold their own press conference in the same location.
I would presume that there are similar rules in place for City Hall. The lawsuit says that the press conference was held “inside” City Hall. When I go there I have to sign in with the guard at the front desk and state where I am going. It’s hard to imagine CCV inviting the press to come inside City Hall without someone’s approval.
11 Jul 2008 at 02:40 am | #
+1 for what MEP said. Leis, Strike-Her & company signed this letter in their official capacities. Add this to the fact that the “news conference” was held at City Hall, and the liability is squarely on both City & County governments, and ultimately the Tax Payer.
Don’t pay any attention to what Jeff Capell (CincyJeff) says, as he is on of the chief republican sockpuppets in the area. He’s also Chris “Kiss My Fanny” Finney’s personal toady. As a poster over at the Cinti Blog showed in a recent posting, COAST and Finney are in bed with Burress and the CCV. That post also revealed COAST to be nothing but another bigoted right wing hate group.
11 Jul 2008 at 05:08 am | #
Heil Cincinnati!
It seems that most of you like government intimidation. “You haben relatives in Germany?” was a popular phrase in the forties. Was it an innocent question?
Why was there so much said of the KKK demonstrating on Fountain Square in past years?
I do believe that most of the responses demonstrate clearly the Cincinnati mentality and while many are quick to condemn the mentality of Cincinnati when the issue is clearly and blatantly obvious, Cincinnatians are showing their basic mentality when the issue has any degree of abstractness.
It is similar of Cincinnatians , finally, having not problem in identifying prejudices against blacks so long as it became clear that blacks are a target of racial discrimination and is not socially and or legally right, but when it came to middle eastern people, Cincinnatians (including Streicher btw), especially after 9-11, Cincinnatians, were confused about the concept of racial discrimination because they didn’t have the continuous messages that had a particular race defined and stated over and over again in the media. It took them a while to figure out that discrimination against Muslims, etc. was just as wrong.
Now it seems that they have a problem with the chilling effect of government intimidation. Most of you would make “good little Germans”. Obviously it bothers me to have to use Germans as an example, but at least I regretfully recognize some faults that are attributed to some Germans with some justification.
In any case, accepting government intimidation is one strong reason Cincinnati will never be a world class city.
Dieter Schmied
11 Jul 2008 at 06:45 am | #
The purpose of all of this, from the original press conference, to the law suit, is free publicity for all involved.
11 Jul 2008 at 07:49 am | #
Interesting topic. I’m not sure what the law says about government officials and government buildings being used for these pressure tactics but an interesting tidbit is that City Beat recently named a Latin acivist their person of the year for pressuring WLW to remove ads he and his group deemed offensive.
11 Jul 2008 at 09:43 am | #
R, one of my friends works for the city and we were talking about activity for the election and he said he couldn’t, and neither could any other city employee. This wouldn’t affect any elected officials, though. They are political by nature.
I don’t know if the county would have those same rules.
11 Jul 2008 at 10:07 am | #
JFD, I tend to agree with you, but I do think that the issue of public servants using their positions is an issue. This could be seen as law enforcement trying to intimidate a media outlet that has been critical of them. I doubt that was really their intention, but it could easily be seen as such.
NtotheC, I bet the county does have similar policies but Leis doesn’t seem to care about obeying laws or protocols.
11 Jul 2008 at 12:40 pm | #
Sorry everyone I forgot to sign my post #15. I’m also sorry for some misinformation I spread. COAST is uninvolved in the CityBeat/CCV feud.
- Gregory
11 Jul 2008 at 01:58 pm | #
Dieter - Yup, and it just kills me that they dont get it . I have been traveling for 8 years basically, and I come back, same people, same crap, same DF moves, same bad business deals. It just amazes me. Cincinnati easily could be a Gem. If they dont tear down all the OTR buildings and make little box houses.
JFD - That’s my point. I just think Citybeat freaked ( he said “ they have been up in arms all week” ) and fell right into their trap. This is what keeps them in business. Elections rolling around, ( I am sure some in that group are up for something) They Fire up the bases, boasting how they are in a fight against evil and the devil in Cincinnati , and will keep going until they slay the beast who is causing sin in this God loving town. Can they actually do anything? Well, I wouldn’t trust Mr Leis to do anything that he didnt want to, and expect him to do anything he wants to without any regard to that constitution thing. I agree it could be intended as intimidation, but Citybeat is actually pretty well covered. The disclaimers, etc etc, are proven protection under the laws regarding such material. The website is a 2nd party and states in essence, that they are not publisher or writers of this second party information ( along those lines) clearly state that the adult section contains ____ you must be 18 blah blah blah, but those are court tested “walls” for such publications and content. They can’t resonable interview every person who takes out an ad for a “body rub” and make sure it is a body rub, and mor e than they can’t make sure the guy who runs an ad for a car, and clains excellent condition. is it? Not their responsiblity.
They do this stuff to raise funds and to excite the far right base, and they have a pretty good following in ohio, and somewhat Nationally. If I were City beat, I would be digging into his non-profit, and wanna bet they find a bunch of stufff their that doesn’t jive? As it stands, they are in a propaganda war, and they love it. Saves them from buying an ad in citybeat. free press in the monetary sense.
NTC_ yes, probably right, but there is alot of stuff this city does they are not supposed to do. Nobody does, and again, dieter is right, its this crap that drives people away in groves. These guys have been digging their own graves for years. It seems that at almost all levels, they are in pretty deep, and dont know how to get out.
I am not sure they intended it, or maybe they did, but i still dont see any basis for the suit. Free speach is for everyone. like it or not.
They have some good people at CityBeat, they ought to dig on this guy. How many of these people have we seen in our lives that turned out to be doing the very stuff they are against? quite a few. I remember hearing some dirt on this guy not long ago. Shine the light on him and his people. These groups usually have some creative financing, and abuse their Non-profit status. It seems to be the new Cincinnati way,. Finding something in that area, and getting their non-profit taken away, is usually a death sentence for these groups. at least or a while. They are like cockroaches, they keep coming back. They will kill 20 people in an abortion clinic, and clain God told them to, and really believe their consience is clear. Same for the Far left Democrats. Blow up a police station? dam right we did, sorry we didn’t kill and hurt more. God says it’s cool. That’s not in any bible, or anything the god I know does.
The bad thing about the suit, if they persist, now they have to give up information in discovery. ( citybeat) do a little Phising.
Citybeat’s power is in the pen as they used to say. Go after this guy in the press. If someone charges them with something, they can try, it wont work, and they can bury this guy. He has his rights to believe, but these right wingers, and left wingers are the scary people in the world. I would not play his game. Everytime citybeat says anything in regards to a suit, etc etc, he will fire off a press release, that out great bird cage lininer will print. Ignor him. If they had something against citybeat, they would have already used it.
I do think it is wrong for people of offical postion to be a part of this. They are in it for votes. Same thing, if all these agencies cited had such a connection to illegal activity regarding citybeat, they would have aleady done something. The lawsuit only gives them a free look inside if they procede.
This city has always been nuts, the country is quickly catching up.
Leaving in droves MEP leaving in droves. It’s very timely.
I know you tried Justin, but the question and answer is how do we get these fools out of office? I am referring to the Cincinnati group of 9, and the former marine? Pretty smart group here. Wanna run again Justin? MEP ? I bet we could get it done this time.
Oh, one more thing. Isn’t this the group that is trying to get the manager, single mother of 2, to be subject of a proposed state law requiring that employee’s of stores such as the Hustler ( a legal business) to have to register as a sex offender because she works there? I believe they are pushing that law in Columbus.Just unbelieveable.
CityBeat, ignore them. Drop the suit and remove their platform. Plus, it will keep them out of your office. as a defendant , and you named all of them, they have the right to certain records, or to look for records. is the suit worth that??? If they had something, they would have already done that. You are right they are setting you up for a Phising trip. thats what would make me nervous. you are giving them the key to the door, for a Phising expedition.
11 Jul 2008 at 03:10 pm | #
City Beat should NOT drop the siut. They should press it and make these Taliban-esque demagogues defend themselves in Court. CCv will have to pony up legal fees, the City/County won’t defend them.
In response to Jeff Capell in post #21; Having read post #15, it didn’t say anything about Coast being involved with the City Beat affair. However having also read the post that #15 referred to at Cincinnatiblog, it’s very clear that Coast & CCV are incahoots together in general.
Those of us who have been paying attention have long realized that Coast is nothing but a group of right wing extremists. Now you can add to that charge “known hate group”.
11 Jul 2008 at 04:06 pm | #
Hmm...since rallys on Fountain Square have to go through 3CDC, does that mean we can rally without permits in City Hall instead?
Be interesting to see the discovery that proves the following:
I am not buying that CityBeat lost 25% of ad revenue as a part of this. Maybe 25% of adult ad revenue but that isn’t how they phrased it.
11 Jul 2008 at 09:23 pm | #
Per this article in the Enquirer, the press conference was scheduled to be held in Room 115 of City Hall. That certainly implies pre-approval by someone in City Hall.
Maybe CityBeat should demand to have a pro-adult services / First Amendment press conference with the same setting and backing as the CCV one. Maybe they could even have some CityBeat advertisers present. I’m sure such a press conference would be well-attended.
After all, it’s their city hall, too.
12 Jul 2008 at 10:32 am | #
Nice outrage by Citybeat, but wrong response to the wingnuts at CCV. The CCV letter isn’t actionable, it’s protected speech just like Citybeat engages in. A few community leaders sign on to an open letter requesting change, and they get sued for it? That’s a bad line of argument to take.
This lawsuit is frivolous, which is unfortunate, because it will make CCV look like a victim.
V
12 Jul 2008 at 01:18 pm | #
The lawsuit is hardly frivolous. The CCV fundies have conspired with government officials to stifle a member of the Forth Estate, and they have committed a tortuous interference with CB’s business. CB has taken precisely the right tactic to respond to the fundies, and they are being represented by the preeminent 1st Amendment attorney in our area. Lou Sirkin. Mr. Sirkin notably represented the Cincinnati Contemporary Arts Centre against Hamilton County after Simon Lies and his jackbooted thugs raided and then prosecuted the museum for hosting a Robert Mapplethorpe exhibit.
If someone doesn’t take a stand the fundies will not stop. Who is next? The Enquirer, The Beacon, local TV stations? Let us remember the poem by Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of the German people following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group;
“When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out”
These fundamentalists are no different than the Nazis or the Taliban. They demand that the entire population adhere to their strict moral code and religious beliefs, and now they are being backed by the power of government. That is completely unacceptable, and must be opposed with all necessary means available.
12 Jul 2008 at 03:34 pm | #
The City Hall issues could be relevant if there was disparate treatment there, but that’s not what CityBeat’s lawsuit is about. If City Hall allowed CCV to hold a press conference inside the building, and denied CB the same opportunity, that would be an open and shut case. I think this community is familiar with such a lawsuit.
But there’s no allegation or suit regarding that issue. If there was such a situation, the lawsuit would have to be filed against the city, not CCV or the letter signers, as it’s the city that controls access to its City Hall.
The same goes with someone charging that Leis, Streicher, or Monzel were using their official positions to sign a letter. One can argue the merits of such a theoretical lawsuit all he wants, but this lawsuit isn’t against those 3 on this issue.
CityBeat’s actual lawsuit is against all 30-something people charging them with violating CB’s 1st Amendment rights. Their evidence is little more than showing these people exercised their own 1st Amendment rights to make a request of CB. The suit as filed has no merit. The 1st Amendment does not protect you from having unpleasant requests made of you.
12 Jul 2008 at 04:03 pm | #
CincyJeff:
Just because you like the CCV, and have a political relationship with their ilk, doesn’t mean they are innocent.
12 Jul 2008 at 04:29 pm | #
Dean:
Just because you dislike CCV doesn’t mean that all litigation against them has any merit. You need to divorce your personal feelings towards the groups from the legal issues surrounding this lawsuit.
And for the record, I have no political relationship whatsoever with CCV and have never done anything with them. Perhaps my lack of any strong feelings for or against them makes it easier for me to see the real issues (or lack thereof) here.
12 Jul 2008 at 04:30 pm | #
Oh, my bad… I didn’t know you had a better understanding of First Amendment law than Louis Sirkin.
12 Jul 2008 at 04:34 pm | #
Legal Seafood, your constant use of the words Nazi and fundies shows your real issue here. Thanks for making my point for me. This isn’t a 1st Amendment lawsuit, it’s an “I hate CCV” lawsuit. Unfortunately people like you don’t understand that the 1st Amendment applies to everyone equally. Simon Leis doesn’t have the right to stiffle our 1st Amendment rights anymore than CityBeat or CCV does.
For you to say that CCV is the same of the Nazis or Taliban shows extreme hatred on your part. If you don’t do what the Nazis or Taliban wants, they’ll murder you and maybe your whole family. If you cross CCV, they’ll hold a press conference at City Hall and announce they’re sending you a letter.
12 Jul 2008 at 04:37 pm | #
My bad. If Louis Sirkin sues someone, case closed. No need to even bother mounting a defense. Seriously, I would have thought that someone who posted as much against Simon Leis as you did in 2007 would have more respect for the 1st Amendment.
While we’re discussing this topic, do you or anyone else want to try explaining where there was a 1st Amendment violation? That is afterall what the suit is alleging.
13 Jul 2008 at 10:50 am | #
The fact CCV used City Hall to make their “request” is similar to employees soliciting other employees within the workplace of the employer. Most employers don’t allow it.
It should not have happened.
And it’s more serious than that, because the workplace involved is City Hall which makes laws we all must follow.
13 Jul 2008 at 02:29 pm | #
There appears to be a First Amendment violation because public officials said that CityBeat was running outright ads for prostitution, and they spoke of violating state law. The First Amendment restricts government from interfering with freedom of the press. It does not pertain to private individuals or groups.
If CityBeat was indeed violating state law, then they should charge them with those violations. If they were not violating state law, then CityBeat has the right to run the ads and be paid for running those ads. That is their First Amendment right.
As the complaint states, CityBeat does not charge for its papers. Its main source of revenue comes from advertisements. No advertisers, no paper. It’s no good to say that the public officials are not prohibiting any criticism of themselves—that they are merely making certain that the paper doesn’t make money.
As the complaint states, the officials were using the “color of state law.” This means that they were doing something that looked official or backed by state law, but was not.
From paragraph 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code, which was referenced in the complaint:
As I understand it, if there had been no “color of law” involved, that is, no participation by City Hall, no police chief, no sheriff, no public official, then there would not have been a First Amendment violation.
(Some disclosure here: I know four of the non-public-official defendants in the suit. I have not talked any of them recently, let alone about this.)
18 Jul 2008 at 07:42 am | #
To me, it all means nothing in the sense that here is a group of “officials” blaming a paper no less, for all the woes of society.
If they have a case, and it is the only way to get them, I am all for it.
But to me it is kind of ironic that like Alchol , cigs. etc etc, they make alot of money from that. Does an agreement between consenting adults seem more dangerous than Alcohol? It has existed since way before the days of jesus ( some say he married a prostitute) but never the less, he was friends with her. If he were around today, would he be hanging out with Phil and the Cheif? Simon Leis? I have seen that guy down 40 drinks in 2 hours, plus 5 bottles of wine and get in his car and drive. He had a 1-800-DUI sticker on his car, and we would call and report it everytime he left the restaurant. Saftey first.
All this is classic Cincinnati. It is why NOTHING will ever change until they get rid of these and new blood comes in that actually wants to work FOR the city. But, is it deal makers run, or do good people run and become deal makers after?
I dont know, but it never stops, and thats why the economy of this City dies more every day. It is going to get way first
Somebody needs to run. MEP, Justine, Dean, Cincy sue? somebody. we can raise money.
Yesterdays downtown lunch hour crowd? On 7th between main and vine, I counted 73 people.
Had dinner at the city restaurant. The city will be paying for this restaurant. dead empty at 9 : pm
DEAN : so I dont have to start another, maybe something on the Fith third employees pension fund. These people are going to be like Enron. The were lying to them about the stock( and everyone else ) and “encouraging them to buy more or hold it in their accounts ( 401 K’s and other pension) these people have lost about 90 % of their retirement, and if they dont join the class action, they are going to have worked there for years, and have NOTHING. C.E. has not mentioned a word. I wonder if they have even told them. My opinion, but this is something they need to know.
Rule number one in your 401 K or other retirement funds. DO NOT hold only your companies stock. FTIB has lost 90 % of the value in less than a year. National city has halted trading several times in the past 2 weeks.
This is going to hurt alot of employees, especially at FTIB. It is a good and valuable story. If they dont join the suit, they are F*&^ed