Rethinking the Cyber-stalking Charge
In conversation with RIFuture’s Bob Plain about the controversy over Republican State Senator Nick Kettle’s Facebook parody site attacking Democrat State Representative Scott Guthrie — which puts me in the uncomfortable position of agreeing with the ACLU — Bob clarified something related.
Specifically, Bob contradicted my understanding of the cyber-stalking case involving National Education Association executive John Leidecker. Perusing various reports on the incident and pursuant trials, it’s understandable that I would have the impression that Leidecker sent emails broadly in the name of Democrat State Representative Doug Gablinske, whom the union had targeted, to discredit him among voters.
As the search warrant for Leidecker’s property made clear, the most detailed complaint involved an apparent “constituent” named Walter Flatus. Other reports noted that Flatus appears to have been Leidecker, himself.
What wasn’t clear from the bulk of the news reports, and what Bob told me explicitly, was that no emails have been found to have gone out to anybody who wasn’t either Gablinske or Leidecker. If that’s the case, then it seems a bit of a stretch to make this out to be a crime called “cyber-stalking.”
Don’t get me wrong. The NEA appears to cultivate people who think it’s their professional duty to behave in very creepy ways. I’ve watched Leidecker perform hysterics in front of a school committee chairman in what appeared to be an attempt to start a fight. I’ve seen him show up to a public speech by a local columnist with the apparent intent to disrupt. (Conspicuously, Leidecker left after he saw me start liveblogging.)
I have no doubt that disorienting and discomfiting Gablinske was Leidecker’s purpose in creating an email chain to himself and then forwarding the whole thing to the representative. Such examples of psychological warfare are fully in keeping with the operations of the NEA and other labor unions, in contract negotiations and electoral politics.
They should absolutely be cause for Rhode Islanders to ponder the significance of having people like that funded by and associated with our public education system. But I don’t think they should be crimes.