first_published_at,last_published_at,title,slug,latest_revision_created_at,charges,legal_orders,updates,categories,links,equipment_seized,equipment_broken,targeted_journalists,authors,date,exact_date_unknown,city,state,latitude,longitude,body,introduction,teaser,teaser_image,primary_video,image_caption,arrest_status,arresting_authority,release_date,detention_date,unnecessary_use_of_force,case_number,case_statuses,case_type,status_of_seized_equipment,is_search_warrant_obtained,actor,border_point,target_us_citizenship_status,denial_of_entry,stopped_previously,did_authorities_ask_for_device_access,did_authorities_ask_about_work,assailant,was_journalist_targeted,charged_under_espionage_act,subpoena_type,subpoena_statuses,name_of_business,third_party_business,legal_order_target,legal_order_type,legal_order_venue,status_of_prior_restraint,mistakenly_released_materials,type_of_denial,targeted_institutions,tags,target_nationality,workers_whose_communications_were_obtained,politicians_or_public_figures_involved 2024-03-14 18:46:42.415061+00:00,2024-03-14 18:46:42.415061+00:00,Judge lifts Indybay gag order over voided search warrant,https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/judge-lifts-indybay-gag-order-over-voided-search-warrant/,2024-03-14 18:46:42.230016+00:00,,LegalOrder object (273),,"Subpoena/Legal Order, Prior Restraint",,,,,,2024-01-24,False,San Francisco,California (CA),37.77493,-122.41942,"
San Francisco police on Jan. 24, 2024, obtained a warrant to search independent news outlet Indybay’s electronic data, along with a 90-day gag order preventing Indybay from discussing or writing about its existence, according to court documents.
The warrant, which police later decided against pursuing, sought to identify the author of an Indybay post who claimed to have vandalized the San Francisco Police Credit Union.
The nondisclosure order was ultimately lifted on March 7 by San Francisco Superior Court Judge Linda Colfax, allowing Indybay to speak publicly about the warrant. Also on March 7, the San Francisco Police Department said it had decided not to act on the warrant due to potential First Amendment issues.
The warrant stemmed from a Jan. 18 post on Indybay, published under the pseudonym “some anarchists,” in which the author took responsibility for having smashed windows at the credit union earlier that day in an “act of vengeance” on the one-year anniversary of the police shooting death of an environmental activist in Atlanta.
Indybay, a volunteer-run, community-sourced newswire also known as the San Francisco Bay Area Independent Media Center, allows anyone to self-publish articles, photos, videos and other material on the site. The posts are reviewed by Indybay editors, who according to the site’s editorial policies may combine them, make edits for spelling or grammar, or hide them if they are deemed “false, libelous, abusive … or hate speech.”
On Jan. 24, the police obtained the search warrant, which required Indybay to turn over information that would help identify the author of the story, such as IP addresses, website login credentials, and email addresses and phone numbers.
Indybay asked the police to withdraw the warrant on Jan. 29, arguing that it was illegal under California’s shield law and the federal Privacy Protection Act, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which provided the outlet with pro bono legal assistance. The SFPD told Indybay on Jan. 31 that it would take no further action on the warrant.
Indybay filed a motion on Feb. 22 not only to formally quash the warrant but also the nondisclosure order — which remained in effect — arguing that it violated the First Amendment as a “content-based prior restraint on speech.”
Colfax vacated the gag order on March 7, while also confirming that the search warrant had become void on Feb. 3, “as no search occurred and no records were received.”
EFF Staff Attorney F. Mario Trujillo told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker in an email that “SFPD and the judge did not end up taking a position” on the argument that the search warrant was unlawful. “SFPD, instead, took the position that—regardless of whether the warrant was unlawful when it was first issued—it became void after 10 days when SFPD declined to pursue it further in the face of Indybay’s resistance,” he added.
Trujillo went on to say that Colfax supported that interpretation in her order, adding, “It was important for the judge to confirm that and give Indybay certainty on the record.”
SFPD, in a March 7 news release, said that when Police Chief William “Bill” Scott learned of the warrant, he “immediately ordered officers to not pursue it over questions about possible First Amendment and Freedom of the Press issues.”
The statement added that the police department is committed to supporting the free press and has policies and training related to California’s shield law. The SFPD had previously pledged to ensure that all employees were properly trained on journalist protections with regard to police searches and subpoenas as part of a settlement after a police raid and search of a journalist’s home in 2019.
A portion of a March 7, 2024, order by a San Francisco judge lifting a gag order that prohibited Indybay from disclosing a search warrant issued in January.
",None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,False,None,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,None,None,None,Institution,warrant,State,struck down,False,[],Indybay,,,, 2023-08-14 19:56:36.521489+00:00,2024-03-10 23:04:51.862572+00:00,"Newsroom, personal equipment seized in Kansas raid",https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/newsroom-personal-equipment-seized-in-kansas-raid/,2024-03-10 23:04:51.719788+00:00,,LegalOrder object (236),"(2023-10-02 15:12:00+00:00) Police chief in Kansas raid resigns; paper reports on new bodycam footage, (2023-08-28 16:24:00+00:00) Kansas authorities to destroy digital files from newspaper raid, (2023-08-30 16:16:00+00:00) Police turn over files secretly copied during raid on Marion County newspaper, destroy backups, (2023-08-16 15:45:00+00:00) Kansas county attorney withdraws search warrant, returns seized equipment","Equipment Search or Seizure, Subpoena/Legal Order",,"computer: count of 4, storage device: count of 1, work product: count of 2",,,,2023-08-11,False,Marion,Kansas (KS),38.34835,-97.01725,"Local law enforcement executed a search warrant on the offices of the Marion County Record on Aug. 11, 2023, seizing computers, cellphones, a file server and journalistic work product. The Kansas newspaper reported that the seizures jeopardized its ability to publish its weekly edition.
A copy of the search warrant, obtained by the Kansas Reflector, shows that the search was undertaken as part of an investigation into alleged unlawful use of a computer and identity theft.
According to the Record, however, when one of the paper’s reporters requested a copy of the probable cause affidavit that summarizes the circumstances and evidence supporting the warrant, the district court issued a signed statement that there wasn’t one on file.
The Record reported that during an Aug. 7 city council meeting a local restaurant owner, Kari Newell, had accused the newspaper of illegally obtaining information that she had a prior DUI conviction and had driven without a license, as well as supplying the information to Marion Vice Mayor Ruth Herbel.
In an article responding to the allegations, Record Publisher and Editor Eric Meyer said that a source had reached out with the information via Facebook, and had independently sent it to Herbel as well. The Record had verified the allegations through a public website but decided not to publish it, instead alerting the Marion Police Department that the source may have obtained the information illegally.
The morning of Aug. 11, Marion County District Court Magistrate Judge Laura Viar signed the search warrant for the Record’s office. Marion Police Department officers and Marion County sheriff’s deputies executed it within two hours, ordering staff to leave the office as equipment was seized.
Officers also arrived simultaneously with a second warrant at Meyer’s home — where he lives with his 98-year-old mother, Joan Meyer, a co-owner and correspondent for the Record, the Reflector reported. Joan Meyer passed away the following day, which the Record attributed in part to the stress of the raid.
Eric Meyer told the Reflector that officers seized “everything” from the newsroom, and that he wasn’t sure how the staff would complete the edition before it needed to go to press on Aug. 15. According to court documents obtained by KSHB, officers seized four computers, a backup hard drive and reporting materials as part of the warrant.
Officers also seized two personal cellphones belonging to reporters Deb Gruver and Phyllis Zorn, which were not listed on the warrant. Gruver alleged on Facebook that Marion Police Chief Gideon Cody injured her finger when he “forcibly yanked” the phone from her hand.
Eric Meyer, a veteran reporter from the Milwaukee Journal and former journalism professor at the University of Illinois, told The Kansas City Star following the raid that the Record had also been investigating Cody’s background and allegations of wrongdoing.
Cody, who did not immediately respond to a request for further information, told the Star that the lack of an article about the allegations shows they had no basis. “If it was true, they would’ve printed it,” Cody said.
On Aug. 14, a coalition of more than 30 press freedom organizations sent a letter to Cody condemning the raid and calling for the return of the newspaper’s equipment and reporting materials.
Freedom of the Press Foundation, which operates the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, called the raid “alarming.”
“Based on the reporting so far, the police raid of the Marion County Record on Friday appears to have violated federal law, the First Amendment, and basic human decency,” said Director of Advocacy Seth Stern. “Everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves.”
In a statement released on Facebook, Cody defended the legality of the raid and said that the Marion Police Department had received assistance from local and state investigators.
“It is true that in most cases, [the federal Privacy Protection Act] requires police to use subpoenas, rather than search warrants, to search the premises of journalists unless they themselves are suspects in the offense that is the subject of the search,” Cody wrote.
Eric Meyer, who could not immediately be reached for comment, told the Record that while the paper’s attorneys are working to have the equipment returned, they also plan to file a federal lawsuit to ensure that such a raid never happens again.
“Our first priority is to be able to publish next week,” he said, “but we also want to make sure no other news organization is ever exposed to the Gestapo tactics we witnessed today. We will be seeking the maximum sanctions possible under law.”
This article was updated to reflect reporting from KSHB around the type of equipment seized.
Editor’s Note: The incident and its metadata have been updated to reflect that the equipment belonging to the Marion County Record was seized as part of a warrant, but the equipment belonging to reporters Deb Gruver and Phyllis Zorn was taken by law enforcement without any legal order permitting the seizure. Gruver’s cellphone seizure and the assault she experienced during the raid are documented here. The seizure of Zorn’s cellphone is now documented here.
Kansas law enforcement officers raided the Marion County Record office Aug. 11, 2023, with a search warrant that free press attorneys and advocates say violated federal law.
",None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,returned in full,True,law enforcement,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,None,None,None,Institution,warrant,State,None,False,[],Marion County Record,,,, 2023-08-14 20:07:39.176170+00:00,2024-03-10 23:05:21.642548+00:00,Kansas newspaper editor’s home raided by local law enforcement,https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/kansas-newspaper-editors-home-raided-by-local-law-enforcement/,2024-03-10 23:05:21.507047+00:00,,LegalOrder object (237),"(2023-10-02 15:15:00+00:00) Police chief in Kansas raid resigns; paper reports on new bodycam footage, (2023-08-16 15:52:00+00:00) Kansas county attorney withdraws search warrant, returns seized equipment, (2023-08-30 14:44:00+00:00) Police turn over photos taken during raid on Marion County publishers’ home","Equipment Search or Seizure, Subpoena/Legal Order",,"cellphone: count of 1, computer: count of 3, storage device: count of 1, work product: count of 1",,"Eric Meyer (Marion County Record), Joan Meyer (Marion County Record)",,2023-08-11,False,Marion,Kansas (KS),38.34835,-97.01725,"Local law enforcement executed a search warrant on the home of the owners and editor/publisher of the Marion County Record on Aug. 11, 2023. A simultaneous raid on the Kansas newspaper’s offices and equipment seizure jeopardized its ability to publish its upcoming weekly edition.
A copy of one of the search warrants, obtained by the Kansas Reflector, shows that the searches were undertaken as part of an investigation into alleged unlawful use of a computer and identity theft.
According to the Record, however, when one of the paper’s reporters requested a copy of the probable cause affidavit that summarizes the circumstances and evidence supporting the warrant, the district court issued a signed statement that there wasn’t one on file.ile.
The Record reported that during an Aug. 7 city council meeting a local restaurant owner, Kari Newell, had accused the newspaper of illegally obtaining information that she had a prior DUI conviction and had driven without a license, as well as supplying the information to Marion Vice Mayor Ruth Herbel.
In an article responding to the allegations, Editor and Publisher Eric Meyer said that a source had reached out with the information via Facebook, and had independently sent it to Herbel as well. The Record had verified the allegations through a public website but decided not to publish it, instead alerting the Marion Police Department that the source may have obtained the information illegally.
The morning of Aug. 11, Marion County District Court Magistrate Judge Laura Viar signed search warrants for the newsroom and Meyer’s home — where he lives with his 98-year-old mother, Joan Meyer, a co-owner and correspondent for the Record. According to the Reflector, Marion Police Department officers and Marion County sheriff’s deputies executed the warrants within hours.
Joan Meyer passed away the following day, which the Record attributed in part to the stress of the raid. According to court documents obtained by KSHB, officers seized three computers, including a router, Eric Meyer’s cellphone, a storage device and reporting materials.
Meyer, a veteran reporter from the Milwaukee Journal and former journalism professor at the University of Illinois, told The Kansas City Star following the raid that the Record had also been investigating Marion Police Chief Gideon Cody’s background and allegations of wrongdoing.
Cody, who did not immediately respond to a request for further information, told the Star that the lack of an article about the allegations shows they had no basis. “If it was true, they would’ve printed it,” Cody said.
On Aug. 14, a coalition of more than 30 press freedom organizations sent a letter to Cody condemning the raids and calling for the return of the newspaper’s equipment and reporting materials.
Freedom of the Press Foundation, which operates the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, called the raid “alarming.”
“Based on the reporting so far, the police raid of the Marion County Record on Friday appears to have violated federal law, the First Amendment, and basic human decency,” said Director of Advocacy Seth Stern. “Everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves.”
In a statement released on Facebook, Cody defended the legality of the raid and said that the Marion Police Department had received assistance from local and state investigators.
“It is true that in most cases, [the federal Privacy Protection Act] requires police to use subpoenas, rather than search warrants, to search the premises of journalists unless they themselves are suspects in the offense that is the subject of the search,” Cody wrote.
Meyer, who could not immediately be reached for comment, told the Record that while the paper’s attorneys are working to have the equipment returned, they also plan to file a federal lawsuit to ensure that such a raid never happens again.
“Our first priority is to be able to publish next week,” Meyer said, “but we also want to make sure no other news organization is ever exposed to the Gestapo tactics we witnessed today. We will be seeking the maximum sanctions possible under law.”
This article was updated to reflect reporting from KSHB around the type of equipment seized.
Kansas law enforcement officers execute a search warrant on the home of Marion County Record co-owners Joan Meyer, second from left, and Eric Meyer, not pictured, on Aug. 11, 2023.
",None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,returned in full,True,law enforcement,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,None,None,None,Journalist,warrant,State,None,False,[],,,,, 2023-08-07 15:28:30.434371+00:00,2024-02-27 15:47:06.293794+00:00,"FBI raids home, office of independent journalist on hacking allegations",https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/fbi-raids-home-office-of-independent-journalist-on-hacking-allegations/,2024-02-27 15:47:06.146250+00:00,,LegalOrder object (235),"(2023-09-29 12:08:00+00:00) FBI returns some equipment seized from Tampa journalist, (2023-11-09 17:37:00+00:00) FBI returns additional equipment seized from Tampa journalist, (2024-02-21 17:10:00+00:00) Florida journalist indicted for alleged conspiracy, computer fraud, wiretapping","Equipment Search or Seizure, Subpoena/Legal Order",,"cellphone: count of 4, computer: count of 9, storage device: count of 7, work product: count of 4",,Tim Burke (Independent),,2023-05-08,False,Tampa,Florida (FL),27.94752,-82.45843,"Florida-based independent journalist Tim Burke awoke on May 8, 2023, to the sound of FBI agents banging on the door of his Tampa home with a search warrant. By the time the raid ended approximately 10 hours later, agents had seized virtually all of the electronics in his newsroom.
The Tampa Bay Times reported that the raid was connected to a criminal probe into “alleged computer intrusions and intercepted communications at the Fox News Network.” At least six behind-the-scenes clips of former Fox host Tucker Carlson were leaked over the past year. The broadcaster has asserted that it did not authorize the release of the footage and that its systems could have been hacked.
Burke, who worked previously at Deadspin and The Daily Beast, has made a career of capturing publicly available livestreams. The Times reported that he launched Burke Communications in 2019, offering contract work and consulting, as well as access to his 181,000-gigabyte video archive.
According to the search warrant for his home, which was unsealed on May 26, officers were authorized to seize all of Burke’s electronics or physical records of alleged violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. The warrant also stipulated that officers could force residents to unlock devices enabled with biometrics, including fingerprints or facial recognition.
In total, federal agents seized nine computers, seven hard drives, four cellphones and four notebooks from Burke’s home and the guesthouse that serves as his office. Two computers belonging to Lynn Hurtak, Burke’s wife and a Tampa City Council member, were also seized, along with a third that the couple both used, Burke told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker in August.
Attorney Mark Rasch, who is representing Burke and created the Justice Department’s Computer Crime Unit, denied any criminal behavior by Burke.
“Hacking is not simply obtaining information that someone would rather you not,” Rasch told the Tracker. “And hacking is also not going to a website that someone would prefer that you not or finding information that they would prefer that you not.”
Rasch said that Burke uses no special software or tools to access or record live feeds, and that viewing them does not require a username or password. Rather, Burke has cultivated search skills and sources that direct him to the URLs where they are publicly visible.
Burke told the Tracker that he’s worked as an assignment editor his entire career, and sees his current work as an extension of that: sifting through content to identify newsworthy material for publication.
“I have always promoted my approach of taking video in its most raw nature as being the best we have when it comes to veracity,” Burke said. “The raw video is the truth. That’s what journalism is, that’s what we’re reporting.”
But Burke told the Tracker that the seizure of his electronics has made it impossible for him to continue his journalistic work.
“It’s very difficult for me to do most of the things that I do as a journalist without my contacts that are on my phone or without the video editing softwares that are on my computer,” Burke said. “I just want to get back to doing this thing that I’ve dedicated my life to.”
The seizures also caused Burke to be locked out of his email, social media, banking and other important accounts. According to Rasch, federal prosecutors asked that Burke waive his Fifth Amendment rights and provide the passcode to his cellphone so it could be cloned. Burke refused.
Burke told the Tracker that prosecutors later said they no longer needed the passcode, and allowed him to access the device to transfer the two-factor authentication applications he needed.
On July 21, Rasch filed a motion for the return of Burke’s devices and to unseal the affidavit submitted in support of the search warrant, which he believes will provide insights into the basis on which Burke is being investigated.
Rasch also highlighted that multiple Justice Department officials — including the U.S. attorney general — are required to approve searches involving journalists or newsrooms, and details of whether investigators followed that procedure should be in the affidavit.
The government response to Rasch’s motion is due by Aug. 9, according to court records.
A portion of the search warrant federal investigators filed for the devices and records of Florida-based journalist Tim Burke. During a search of Burke’s Tampa home and office on May 8, 2023, FBI agents seized two dozen pieces of journalistic equipment.
",None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,returned in part,True,law enforcement,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,None,None,None,Journalist,warrant,Federal,None,False,[],,,,, 2022-11-08 21:27:20.582038+00:00,2023-08-16 17:13:11.128343+00:00,Ohio editor charged with wiretapping after publishing obtained court recording,https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/ohio-editor-charged-with-wiretapping-after-publishing-obtained-court-recording/,2023-08-16 17:13:10.959830+00:00,"wiretapping: interception of wire, oral or electronic communications (charges dropped as of 2023-08-10)",LegalOrder object (203),(2023-08-14 13:11:00+00:00) Wiretapping charge against Ohio editor dropped after more than nine months,"Arrest/Criminal Charge, Subpoena/Legal Order",,,,Derek Myers (Scioto Valley Guardian),,2022-10-31,False,Waverly,Ohio (OH),None,None,"Scioto Valley Guardian Editor-in-Chief Derek Myers was charged with felony wiretapping on Oct. 31, 2022, after publishing a recording of witness testimony from an ongoing trial in Waverly, Ohio.
Myers told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker he has been covering the murder trial of George Wagner IV, which began in September. As part of that coverage, the newspaper was using a laptop to livestream witness testimony and exhibits. Judge Randy Deering issued an order before the trial began allowing anyone testifying in the case to “opt out” of being filmed by the media. The Fourth District Court of Appeals issued an emergency order overruling him partway through the testimony of Wagner’s brother, Jake, who was indicted alongside Wagner and their parents for the 2016 killings of eight members of the Rhoden family.
The court ordered that media be allowed to film unless Deering was able to show cause that it could jeopardize the fairness of the trial. Deering ruled that if Jake were to appear on camera he might be “nervous” and untruthful, again barring media from recording video or audio of him.
Myers told the Tracker that he was out of the country when Jake took the stand, but that someone in the courtroom surreptitiously recorded his testimony and provided it to the Guardian. After deliberation, Myers published a condensed version of the audio on Oct. 28.
According to files reviewed by the Tracker, Judge Anthony Moraleja approved a search warrant that day for a Guardian laptop being used to livestream the trial. The Tracker documented the laptop seizure and the illegal seizure of Myers’ cellphone here.
The Pike County Sheriff’s Office subsequently charged Myers with interception of wire, electronic or oral communications, a fourth degree felony. According to court records, he was charged under Ohio Revised Code Section 2933.52 (A)(3), which forbids the use of a recording that one knows or has reason to believe was illegally obtained.
Myers turned himself into custody on Nov. 1 and was released after paying a $20,000 bond. He told the Tracker that he pleaded not guilty at a hearing the following day. He also waived his right to a preliminary hearing, where evidence is presented before a judge who decides whether the case should advance to trial. Instead, his case will be heard by a grand jury, which will determine whether to indict him on the charges.
When reached for comment, the Pike County Prosecutor’s Office told the Tracker that the next grand jury session is scheduled to begin in February 2023, when the new prosecutor takes office.
One of Myers’ attorneys, John Greiner, highlighted the Supreme Court ruling in Bartnicki v. Vopper, which ruled that the media cannot be held liable for publishing information that was obtained illegally by a source.
The Committee to Protect Journalists, a founding partner of the Tracker, condemned the equipment seizure and the charges against Myers in a statement.
“The incompetency of local law enforcement to abide by basic legal proceedings would be comical if it were not so concerning,” said CPJ U.S. and Canada Program Coordinator Katherine Jacobsen. “Not only have Pike County authorities confiscated journalist Derek Myers’ cellphone and the Scioto Valley Guardian’s laptop without presenting a valid warrant, but they have also lobbed wiretapping charges against Myers for keeping the community informed about an ongoing murder trial. Retaliating against a news outlet, especially a small local publication, for doing their jobs in matters of public interest is completely unacceptable.”
Myers told the Tracker he hasn’t been able to cover the trial since his arrest.
“I tasked myself with covering this eight-week trial and I should be there covering it, but I can’t because I don’t have the equipment,” Myers said. “And, frankly, I don’t feel safe in that courthouse. If I take another cellphone down there they’ll probably seize that too.”
Scioto Valley Guardian Editor-in-Chief Derek Myers was charged with felony wiretapping on Oct. 31, 2022, after publishing an obtained recording of testimony from an ongoing murder trial in Waverly, Ohio.
",arrested and released,Pike County Sheriff's Office,None,2022-11-01,False,None,[],None,None,False,None,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,Journalist,warrant,State,None,False,None,,,,, 2022-11-08 20:51:03.315316+00:00,2023-11-03 18:02:12.856665+00:00,"Editor’s laptop, cellphone seized following publication of courtroom recording",https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/editors-laptop-cellphone-seized-following-publication-of-courtroom-recording/,2023-11-03 18:02:12.719391+00:00,,LegalOrder object (202),,"Equipment Search or Seizure, Subpoena/Legal Order",,"cellphone: count of 1, computer: count of 1",,Derek Myers (Scioto Valley Guardian),,2022-10-28,False,Waverly,Ohio (OH),39.12673,-82.98546,"An Ohio judge authorized the search and seizure of a laptop belonging to the Scioto Valley Guardian on Oct. 28, 2022. An officer with the Pike County Sheriff’s Office also seized the cellphone of the outlet’s top editor — without a warrant — a few days later.
Guardian Editor-in-Chief Derek Myers told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker he has been covering the ongoing murder trial of George Wagner IV, which began in September. As part of that coverage, the newspaper was using a laptop to livestream witness testimony and exhibits. Judge Randy Deering issued an order before the trial began allowing anyone testifying in the case to “opt out” of being filmed by the media. The Fourth District Court of Appeals issued an emergency order overruling him partway through the testimony of Wagner’s brother, Jake, who was indicted alongside Wagner and their parents for the 2016 killings of eight members of the Rhoden family.
The court ordered that media be allowed to film unless Deering was able to show cause that it could jeopardize the fairness of the trial. Deering ruled that if Jake were to appear on camera he might be “nervous” and untruthful, again barring media from recording video or audio of him.
Myers told the Tracker that he was out of the country when Jake took the stand, but that someone in the courtroom surreptitiously recorded his testimony and provided it to the Guardian. After deliberation, Myers said he elected to move forward with publishing a condensed version of the audio on Oct. 28.
According to files reviewed by the Tracker, county court Judge Anthony Moraleja approved a search warrant for the Guardian laptop that same day, authorizing the search of the MacBook Pro and any computer software or communications contained on its hard drive. Myers told the Tracker someone from the court then seized the laptop, causing the outlet’s livestream to go down.
One of Myers’ attorneys, Greg Barwell, sent a letter on Oct. 31 asking the sheriff, prosecutor and the court to return the equipment, as the Guardian had not been presented with a subpoena or search warrant.
Myers went to the Pike County Courthouse on Nov. 2 to ask for the return of the laptop in person, as he still believed it had been seized by someone from the court. Unbeknownst to the Guardian, the laptop had been taken into custody by the sheriff’s office the previous day.
Myers told the Tracker that when he passed through the metal detector, a captain from the sheriff’s department told him he would have to take his cellphone back outside. He responded that he wouldn’t be going into the courtroom — where cellphones and laptops are prohibited — but would be remaining on the first floor.
Myers said the officer then kept his cellphone, claiming, “On second thought, I think I have a search warrant for that.”
The officer also told Myers that they had a search warrant for the laptop. The item seizure report reviewed by the Tracker has “Black I-Phone” written below the MacBook, confirming that it was seized at 10:29 a.m. on Nov. 2.
One of Myers’ attorneys, John Greiner, told the Tracker that the seizure of the devices likely violated Ohio’s shield law and the federal Privacy Protection Act, which prohibits searching or seizing journalistic work products with few exceptions.
In connection with the publication of the testimony recording, Myers was charged with intercepting wire, oral or electronic communications — a fourth degree felony — on Oct. 31. The Tracker has documented those charges here.
The Committee to Protect Journalists, a founding partner of the Tracker, condemned the equipment seizure and the charges against Myers in a statement.
“The incompetency of local law enforcement to abide by basic legal proceedings would be comical if it were not so concerning,” said CPJ U.S. and Canada Program Coordinator Katherine Jacobsen. “Not only have Pike County authorities confiscated journalist Derek Myers’ cellphone and the Scioto Valley Guardian’s laptop without presenting a valid warrant, but they have also lobbed wiretapping charges against Myers for keeping the community informed about an ongoing murder trial. Retaliating against a news outlet, especially a small local publication, for doing their jobs in matters of public interest is completely unacceptable.”
Myers told the Tracker that he was able to regain control over his cellphone number on Nov. 4, but having the devices returned remains his and his attorneys’ first priority. He said he was extremely concerned about the potential search of the devices as they contain sensitive work product and source communications
“I can’t effectively do my job because I’m so focused and scared and worried about all these other people and their livelihoods are now on the line,” Myers said. “And I can’t cover the trial because I don’t have the equipment.”
On Oct. 28, 2022, an Ohio judge authorized the search and seizure of a Scioto Valley Guardian laptop, shown here in a screenshot from the search warrant, that the outlet was using to livestream a Waverly murder trial.
",None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,in custody,True,law enforcement,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,Journalist,warrant,State,None,False,None,,,,, 2022-09-27 17:41:09.041418+00:00,2024-02-29 19:10:27.753285+00:00,"Devices illegally seized in investigation of reporter’s murder, Review-Journal argues",https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/devices-illegally-seized-in-investigation-of-reporters-murder-review-journal-argues/,2024-02-29 19:10:27.606479+00:00,,LegalOrder object (197),"(2022-10-11 15:26:00+00:00) Judge grants injunction barring searching slain reporter’s devices until agreement reached, (2022-11-15 13:47:00+00:00) Judges side with Review-Journal in series of rulings on seizure of slain reporter’s devices, (2022-10-05 11:34:00+00:00) Judge grants Review-Journal emergency protective order against searching slain reporter’s devices, (2024-01-25 14:43:00+00:00) Review-Journal staff authorized to search slain reporter’s devices, (2022-10-19 12:05:00+00:00) Injunction to be heard by Nevada Supreme Court following police department appeal, (2023-10-05 15:04:00+00:00) Nevada top court says search protocol in Jeff German case violates privilege, (2022-12-16 14:30:00+00:00) Review-Journal files for sanctions after learning that police searched journalist’s phone, (2023-01-25 15:40:00+00:00) Judge denies sanctions against the Las Vegas police for search slain reporter’s phone","Equipment Search or Seizure, Subpoena/Legal Order",,"cellphone: count of 1, computer: count of 4, storage device: count of 1",,Jeff German (Las Vegas Review-Journal),,2022-09-03,True,Las Vegas,Nevada (NV),36.17497,-115.13722,"The Las Vegas Review-Journal filed a motion for a protective order on Sept. 26, 2022, arguing that authorities should be barred from searching the electronic devices seized as part of the investigation into the murder of reporter Jeff German.
German, who had covered crime and political corruption in Las Vegas for more than 40 years, was stabbed outside his home on Sept. 2. Clark County Public Administrator Robert Telles was arrested on suspicion of murder less than a week later and is being held without bail awaiting trial.
According to court filings reviewed by the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, both Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo and Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson contacted the Review-Journal, alerting the newspaper to the seizure of German’s devices and requesting a waiver to allow authorities to search them.
The Clark County District Attorney’s Office did not respond to an emailed request for comment.
In total, officers seized an iPhone, three iMacs, a Macbook and an external hard drive from German’s home, according to the motion. The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department told the newspaper in writing on Sept. 16 that the devices had not been searched and would not be until the court issued an order authorizing the review.
Ashley Kissinger, an attorney representing the newspaper, sent a letter to the Metro Police Department, the Clark County public defender representing Telles and the District Attorney’s Office on Sept. 21 listing their concerns and requesting a call to further discuss the issue. Kissinger sent a follow up letter two days later proposing a resolution before resorting to filing a motion for a protective order.
When reached for comment, Review-Journal Executive Editor Glenn Cook provided a copy of the motion and declined to comment further.
The letters and the motion filed on the Review-Journal’s behalf on Sept. 26 argue that German’s contacts, communications and work product are protected from seizure and review under Nevada’s shield law and the federal Privacy Protection Act.
“The Review-Journal appreciates the efforts of law enforcement to investigate the murder of Mr. German, and of all those seeking to ensure that justice is done for this horrific crime,” the motion states. “However, the newspaper has serious and urgent concerns about the protection of confidential sources and other unpublished journalistic work product contained in the Seized Devices.”
The motion further requests that the court allow the Review-Journal to review the devices, identify the newsgathering materials contained on them and determine whether it wishes to waive its privilege concerning any of the files.
The Committee to Protect Journalists, a founding partner of the Tracker, expressed its support for the newspaper.
“A murder investigation should not be used as a pretext to access unreported source material that should be protected by both the First Amendment and Nevada’s shield law,” CPJ U.S. and Canada Program Coordinator Katherine Jacobsen said in a statement. “If law enforcement were to gain access to decades of Jeff German’s unpublished work, including sensitive source material, it would make an already difficult situation even worse.”
According to the court filing, a hearing on the motion is scheduled for Sept. 28.
A portion of the motion filed on behalf of the Las Vegas Review-Journal seeking to protect the newsgathering materials contained on multiple devices seized from slain reporter Jeff German’s home in September 2022.
",None,None,None,None,False,A-22-859361-C,['ONGOING'],Civil,in custody,True,law enforcement,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,Journalist,warrant,State,None,False,[],,,,, 2022-01-26 15:11:19.960825+00:00,2024-02-29 19:14:08.440271+00:00,"Radio reporter’s phone seized by North Dakota police, later returned",https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/radio-reporters-phone-seized-by-north-dakota-police-later-returned/,2024-02-29 19:14:08.287104+00:00,,LegalOrder object (168),,"Equipment Search or Seizure, Subpoena/Legal Order",,cellphone: count of 1,,Tom Simon (KXWI-FM),,2022-01-10,False,Williston,North Dakota (ND),48.14697,-103.61797,"A North Dakota police investigator seized a cellphone belonging to Tom Simon, a Williston-based reporter for Coyote Radio 98.5 and Williston Trending Topics News Radio Live, during a school board meeting on Jan. 10, 2022. The phone was ultimately returned.
Simon told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker he had been covering the departure of the school district’s former superintendent since October 2021. Multiple individuals contacted Simon with details from a closed executive session of the school board. In the wake of his reporting, Williston police initiated an investigation at the behest of the school board president and enlisted the help of the North Dakota Bureau of Criminal Investigation to identify Simon’s sources.
The BCI obtained a search warrant for Simon’s cellphone on Jan. 4 but waited six days — until the next school board meeting — to execute it. Simon told the Tracker that BCI police investigator Charissa Remus approached him during the Jan. 10 meeting and asked him to come with her to answer some questions.
While Remus asked him to identify his sources, Simon said a second agent seized his cellphone from the table where he had left it. Remus then presented Simon a copy of the signed search warrant and asked him to tell her the device’s passcode. Simon refused to identify his sources but provided the passcode, not knowing whether he had the right to refuse.
Under the state’s shield law, police cannot seize a journalist’s work product without a court hearing to determine if the “failure of disclosure of such evidence will cause a miscarriage of justice.” No such hearing was held in Simon’s case.
The Associated Press reported that North Dakota Newspaper Association Attorney Jack McDonald contacted state Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem about the seizure the following day, and Stenehjem immediately ordered that the phone be returned to Simon.
According to documents reviewed by the Tracker, Simon’s phone was returned to him just before 3 p.m. on Jan. 11 without having been searched or its contents downloaded. Simon’s attorney, Kevin Chapman, told the Tracker they are working with a computer expert to confirm whether the phone’s contents were accessed while it was in custody.
“Having it returned quickly does not solve the problem,” Simon told the Tracker. “Once the veil of secrecy is pierced, the message to the sources or future sources is that law enforcement can still find out who they are, and that message is difficult to stomach.”
Simon said he was particularly concerned by the decision to hold off serving the warrant until it could be done in front of his presumed sources in order to intimidate them.
Judge Benjamen Johnson also signed a search warrant sent to Verizon Wireless for Simon’s phone records, which the Tracker documented here. On Jan. 11, Remus, the BCI agent, wrote a letter to Verizon telling them to “PLEASE DISREGARD IMMEDIATELY.” The police investigation has since been closed.
Stenehjem told the AP that some people involved in the chain of events did not know that Simon was protected by the shield law and expressed regret over the mistake.
In a statement shared with the Tracker, Stenhjem said, “This office reviewed the matter and determined that the phone was lawfully taken pursuant to a valid search warrant issued by a judge.
“The attorney general advised the agent that in light of a state statute that requires a further court warrant to view the contents of the phone in cases like this.”
A spokesperson for Stenehjem’s office told Fargo-based outlet InForum that moving forward all current and future BCI agents will receive training on the state’s shield law and it will be incorporated into the curriculum at the Law Enforcement Training Academy.
Chapman told the Tracker he is researching potential civil rights claims but said they have not decided if or when they will file a lawsuit.
“There has to be a freedom of the press. Reporters should be able to feel free to go get the news and to do investigative journalism without law enforcement breathing down their necks and then pressuring them for their sources,” Chapman said. “This is a perfect example of overreaching on behalf of law enforcement into the rights of private citizens and it simply cannot stand.”
A portion of the search warrant for the cellphone belonging to radio reporter Tom Simon, who was reporting on a school board’s handling of the departure of the district’s former superintendent.
",None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,returned in full,False,law enforcement,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,Journalist,warrant,State,None,False,[],,,,, 2022-01-26 15:13:32.007244+00:00,2022-11-08 20:38:34.280404+00:00,Search warrant issued for North Dakota reporter’s phone records amid police investigation,https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/search-warrant-issued-for-north-dakota-reporters-phone-records-amid-police-investigation/,2022-11-08 20:38:34.209928+00:00,,LegalOrder object (167),,Subpoena/Legal Order,,,,Tom Simon (KXWI-FM),,2022-01-04,False,Williston,North Dakota (ND),48.14697,-103.61797,"A North Dakota police investigator obtained a search warrant for the phone records of Tom Simon, a Williston-based reporter for Coyote Radio 98.5 and Williston Trending Topics News Radio Live, on Jan. 4, 2022.
The Associated Press reported that Simon was covering a series of closed-door meetings about the school board’s handling of the departure of the district’s former superintendent. Simon told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker that multiple individuals contacted him with details from an executive session of the school board. In the wake of his reporting, Williston police initiated an investigation at the behest of the school board president and enlisted the help of the North Dakota Bureau of Criminal Investigation to identify Simon’s sources.
Judge Benjamen Johnson signed a search warrant for the seizure of Simon’s cellphone and a second warrant issued to Verizon Wireless for the reporter’s cellphone records on Jan. 4. Both warrants were reviewed by the Tracker.
During a school board meeting on Jan. 10, BCI agents approached Simon, demanded that he identify his sources, presented him with the signed search warrant and confiscated his cellphone. The Tracker has documented that seizure here.
Under the state’s shield law, police cannot seize a journalist’s work product without a court hearing to determine if the “failure of disclosure of such evidence will cause a miscarriage of justice.” No such hearing was held in Simon’s case.
The AP reported that North Dakota Newspaper Association Attorney Jack McDonald contacted state Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem about the seizure the following morning, and Stenehjem immediately ordered the phone returned. That same day, BCI police investigator Charissa Remus wrote a letter to Verizon telling the communications company to “PLEASE DISREGARD IMMEDIATELY.” The police investigation has since been closed.
Stenehjem told the AP that some people involved in the chain of events did not know that Simon was protected by the shield law and expressed regret over the mistake.
In a statement shared with the Tracker, Stenhjem said, “This office reviewed the matter and determined that the phone was lawfully taken pursuant to a valid search warrant issued by a judge.
“The attorney general advised the agent that in light of a state statute that requires a further court warrant to view the contents of the phone in cases like this.”
A spokesperson for Stenehjem’s office told Fargo-based outlet InForum that moving forward all current and future BCI agents will receive training on the state’s shield law and it will be incorporated into the curriculum at the Law Enforcement Training Academy.
Simon’s attorney, Kevin Chapman, told the Tracker he is researching potential civil rights claims but said they have not decided if or when they will file a lawsuit.
“There has to be a freedom of the press. Reporters should be able to feel free to go get the news and to do investigative journalism without law enforcement breathing down their necks and then pressuring them for their sources,” Chapman said. “This is a perfect example of overreaching on behalf of law enforcement into the rights of private citizens and it simply cannot stand.”
A portion of the search warrant issued to Verizon for phone records belonging to radio reporter Tom Simon, who was reporting on a school board’s handling of the departure of the district’s former superintendent.zf
",None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,False,None,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,journalist communications or work product,['DROPPED'],Verizon Wireless,telecom company,Third-party,warrant,State,None,False,None,,,,, 2022-01-06 15:20:11.838984+00:00,2023-11-03 18:09:29.796592+00:00,"Reporter arrested, phone confiscated while covering NC homeless camp eviction",https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/reporter-arrested-phone-confiscated-while-covering-nc-homeless-camp-eviction/,2023-11-03 18:09:29.594032+00:00,trespassing (convicted as of 2023-06-16),LegalOrder object (256),"(2023-06-16 14:29:00+00:00) Asheville reporter convicted of trespassing following jury trial, (2023-04-19 16:26:00+00:00) Reporters convicted on trespassing charges, immediately appealed for jury trial, (2022-03-11 09:55:00+00:00) Police return phone, belongings to reporter after obtaining search warrant, (2023-05-03 12:43:00+00:00) Asheville reporter learns of cellphone search warrant, park ban in lead up to jury trial","Arrest/Criminal Charge, Equipment Search or Seizure, Subpoena/Legal Order",,cellphone: count of 1,,Matilda Bliss (The Asheville Blade),,2021-12-25,False,Asheville,North Carolina (NC),35.60095,-82.55402,"Asheville Blade reporter Matilda Bliss was arrested alongside a colleague while covering a police eviction of a homeless encampment in Asheville, North Carolina, on Dec. 25, 2021.
Bliss, whose pronouns are she/they, told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker she had been at Aston Park multiple times throughout the day but had left to run an errand at approximately 9 p.m. Both Bliss and Blade reporter Veronica Coit returned to the park a little before 10 p.m. after receiving texts about a growing police force gathering at the park. A small encampment in the park was the latest focus of ongoing city efforts to clear Asheville’s homeless populations out of public areas, according to the Asheville Citizen Times.
As officers directed everyone in the camp to “move on” under threat of arrest, Coit and Bliss documented their actions from a distance, Bliss told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker. The Blade reported that one of the officers then pointed toward Coit and said, “[They’re] taking pictures.”
Five officers then advanced toward Coit and placed them under arrest. Several officers then told Bliss to immediately leave the park or face arrest. Bliss repeatedly identified as a member of the press before she, too, was arrested.
The Blade reported that Bliss was wearing a press badge issued by the outlet at the time of her arrest.
Asheville police just arrested Blade reporters @matilda_bliss and Veronica Coit. Both were on the ground covering the events at Aston Park, displaying press id #avlnews #avlgov
— Asheville Blade (@AvlBlade) December 26, 2021
“According to the last things [Bliss and Coit] observed, and from sources they later spoke with, APD then grew even more violent, dragging campers out of tents and arresting them,” the Blade reported. “Our journalists were clearly targeted first to remove those who could quickly bring the brutality that followed to the public’s attention.”
Coit and Bliss were each charged with second degree trespassing, which carries a penalty of up to 20 days in jail and a $200 fine.
Blade founder and editor David Forbes told the Tracker that while Coit was released shortly after midnight, Bliss was left handcuffed in a police car for more than two hours and was the last person released from custody. Forbes said that to the best of the journalists’ knowledge, Bliss was the only arrestee whose phone was confiscated.
Bliss told the Tracker that when she was released at approximately 1:50 a.m. on the 26th, officers did not return her belongings, stating that they are being held as evidence and that it’s up to the district attorney to approve their release. The Asheville Police Department did not return a call requesting comment.
The Committee to Protect Journalists condemned the arrests in a statement on Twitter a few days after the incident:
“Authorities in #Asheville, NC should drop all charges against @AvlBlade reporters Veronica Coit and @matilda_bliss, who were arrested on December 25. We are deeply concerned that @AshevillePolice interfered with their reporting, and unnecessarily confiscated Bliss's phone.”
Forbes told the Tracker that the charges against Bliss and Coit are still pending and they both have hearings scheduled for March 8, 2022.
“It was a hard experience but also I’m not going to back down either,” Bliss told the Tracker. “That’s the only way that this doesn’t happen to other people.”
While documenting police engaging in a sweep of a homeless encampment in Asheville, North Carolina, on Dec. 25, 2021, two Asheville Blade journalists were arrested and charged with trespassing.
",arrested and released,Asheville Police Department,2021-12-26,None,False,None,[],None,returned in full,True,law enforcement,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,Journalist,warrant,State,None,False,None,,encampment,,, 2023-07-25 18:38:44.318333+00:00,2023-07-25 18:38:44.318333+00:00,"Texas journalist files suit following arrest, equipment seizure",https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/texas-journalist-files-suit-following-arrest-equipment-seizure/,2023-07-25 18:38:43.966822+00:00,obstruction: interference with public duties (charges pending as of 2022-05-16),"LegalOrder object (230), LegalOrder object (231)",,"Arrest/Criminal Charge, Equipment Search or Seizure, Subpoena/Legal Order",,"storage device: count of 2, external battery: count of 1, cellphone: count of 1, miscellaneous equipment: count of 3, camera: count of 2, recording equipment: count of 1",,Justin Pulliam (Independent),,2021-12-21,False,Damon,Texas (TX),None,None,"Independent journalist Justin Pulliam was arrested and his equipment seized while filming a mental health check by Fort Bend County Sheriff’s deputies in Damon, Texas, on Dec. 21, 2021. He was charged with interference with public duties but the initial proceedings ended in a mistrial in March 2023. In the interim, Pulliam filed a federal lawsuit against the county.
Pulliam lives in Fort Bend County near Houston and independently reports on local government and law enforcement for his social media channels, including on YouTube and Facebook. According to his lawsuit, Pulliam followed officers to a remote corner of the county where they were conducting a wellness check on a man whose case Pulliam had been following for several years.
“Justin had recorded previous [sheriff’s office] interactions with the mentally ill man and believed officers had a history of unnecessarily escalating their responses to him,” the lawsuit stated.
Pulliam began filming from a gas station located approximately 130 feet from the man’s home after receiving permission from his mother, according to his footage from the incident. At some point, a deputy informed the other officers via radio that Pulliam had arrived, identifying him by name and as a “local journalist,” Pulliam’s lawsuit stated.
Moments after two mental health advocates arrived at the scene, a deputy approached and first directed only Pulliam and then the advocates to go across the street. Pulliam began walking toward the street, but turned to resume filming when the advocates began speaking to the officer.
Seconds later, the officer again directed Pulliam to leave; Pulliam responded that he had a right to be there as long as the other bystanders were permitted to remain. As the officer began walking toward him while counting down from five, Pulliam’s footage shows him backing up further until the officer reached him and placed him under arrest.
During the booking process, Sheriff Eric Fagan and the chief deputy took Pulliam into a room and attempted to question him, according to his lawsuit. When he refused to speak without an attorney, both reportedly became agitated and indicated that the booking process would continue, according to the lawsuit.
Pulliam was released after several hours once his $500 bail was posted. His equipment — which included a hand-held camera, body camera and cellphone — remained in police custody. The majority of the equipment was returned on Jan. 7, 2022, though the sheriff’s office continued to hold his body camera, memory cards and cellphone.
A week later, officers obtained search warrants for the memory cards and body camera, arguing that they held evidence of Pulliam’s alleged interference with public duties. A grand jury indicted Pulliam on May 16, 2022.
Pulliam’s case went to trial on March 28, 2023, according to court records reviewed by the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker. It was ruled a mistrial after one of the six jurors held that Pulliam should be convicted while the other jurors voted to acquit, confirmed Christie Hebert, one of the attorneys at the public interest law firm Institute for Justice representing Pulliam in his federal suit.
Wesley Wittig, second assistant district attorney for Fort Bend County, told the Tracker that no new trial date has been requested.
For Pulliam, it has been a life-altering experience. “It’s not just the arrest and one police officer,” Pulliam told the Tracker in July 2023. “It’s like the whole system is out to get you. And so that, taken as a whole, is very chilling. It makes me scared to really do much of any filming in this county.”
The Institute for Justice filed the civil rights lawsuit on Pulliam’s behalf on Dec. 5, 2022, against the county, Sheriff Fagan and four others in the sheriff’s office. The suit alleges violations of Pulliam’s First, Fourth and 14th Amendment rights by arresting him and seizing his equipment, as well as by barring him from one of the sheriff’s press conferences in July 2021.
On June 29, 2023, District Judge David Hittner denied the county’s motion to dismiss the majority of Pulliam’s claims. Hittner ruled that Pulliam had sufficiently argued that he had been singled out for exercising his First Amendment rights and that the officers are not protected by qualified immunity at this time.
The Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Office declined to comment when reached in July 2023, citing the ongoing litigation.
Hebert said in a statement following the ruling that Hittner recognized the gravity of Pulliam’s claims.
“The heart of the First Amendment is the right to speak out about government, and Fort Bend County does not get to pick and choose who will cover their activities,” Hebert said.
Hebert told the Tracker that the case is tentatively scheduled to go to trial in early 2024.
Independent journalist Justin Pulliam was arrested by a Fort Bend County Sheriff’s deputy while documenting a mental health call on Dec. 21, 2021. A year later, Pulliam filed a civil rights lawsuit against the sheriff’s office.
",arrested and released,Fort Bend County Sheriff's Office,None,None,False,4:22-cv-04210,['ONGOING'],Civil,returned in part,True,law enforcement,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,None,None,None,Journalist,warrant,State,None,False,None,,,,, 2021-12-07 20:51:40.432682+00:00,2023-11-03 18:10:10.144717+00:00,"Photojournalist arrested, equipment seized while documenting homeless encampment",https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/photojournalist-arrested-equipment-seized-while-documenting-homeless-encampment/,2023-11-03 18:10:09.904030+00:00,"assault: battery on a police officer with injury (charges dropped as of 2021-12-28), obstruction: resisting an executive officer (charges dropped as of 2021-12-28), assault: battery on a police officer (charges dropped as of 2021-12-28)",LegalOrder object (164),"(2021-12-09 12:33:00+00:00) Police obtain search warrant after seizing photojournalist’s equipment during an arrest, (2021-12-28 11:42:00+00:00) No charges for photojournalist arrested while reporting on Sausalito homeless encampment, (2022-02-21 09:51:00+00:00) Photojournalist sues city, police following arrest while reporting on Sausalito homeless encampment","Arrest/Criminal Charge, Assault, Equipment Search or Seizure, Subpoena/Legal Order",,"cellphone: count of 1, external battery: count of 1, camera: count of 1, storage device: count of 2, camera lens: count of 1, camera equipment: count of 1, recording equipment: count of 3",,Jeremy Portje (Freelance),,2021-11-30,False,Sausalito,California (CA),37.85909,-122.48525,"Freelance photojournalist Jeremy Portje was arrested and charged with two misdemeanors and a felony while documenting a homeless encampment in Sausalito, California, on Nov. 30, 2021, according to an officer from the Sausalito Police Department.
Portje was filming for a documentary about homelessness in Marin County, according to the Pacific Sun, a weekly newspaper in the county. A witness identified as a volunteer at the encampment told the Pacific Sun that an officer was following Portje and deliberately stood in front of his camera as he tried to film.
The volunteer told the newspaper an officer grabbed Portje’s camera without provocation, and appeared to accidentally hit himself with the equipment.
“The officer reacted to the camera hitting him,” the volunteer told the Pacific Sun. “He started punching Jeremy.”
Portje attempted to defend himself from the blows but was quickly forced to the ground and placed under arrest, the newspaper reported. At some point during the altercation the officer threw Portje’s camera to the ground. No equipment damage was mentioned in initial reports of the incident.
In footage of Portje’s arrest published by the Pacific Sun, the photojournalist can be heard saying, “Why are they doing this? Because I asked them questions?”
Neither Portje nor his attorney responded to requests for comment.
Portje’s camera can be seen lying on the pavement behind him as two officers work to place him in handcuffs while a third keeps the growing crowd back as voices can be heard shouting “let him go” and “don’t hurt him.”
An officer from the Sausalito Police Department told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker that Portje was arrested shortly after 5 p.m. and charged with resisting an executive officer, battery on a police officer and battery on a police officer with injury. If convicted on all charges, Portje faces up to $5,000 in fines, three years imprisonment or both.
Charles Dresow, a criminal defense attorney representing Portje, told the Pacific Sun the photojournalist spent the night in jail and was released the following morning on $15,000 bail.
“My journalist client ended up on the ground,” Dresow said. “It’s clear the Sausalito police used force to arrest a journalist. To say this is an outrage of constitutional proportions is an understatement.”
When reached for comment, Sausalito Mayor Jill Hoffman told the Tracker officers were called to the park to respond to a disturbance and that Portje had interfered with police activity, injuring a police sergeant in the process.
“We have shown that we support and respect the right to free speech,” Hoffman said. “What is unacceptable is impeding a police investigation and injuring a member of our department.”
Hoffman confirmed that Portje’s camera equipment was seized as evidence.
The Pacific Sun reported that the three officers who arrested him were the same officers who arrested two homeless people for camping in a park two weeks prior. According to the newspaper, Portje had recently made a public records request for the body camera footage from that incident.
On Nov. 6, 2021, FBI agents raided the Mamaroneck, New York, home of conservative group Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe as part of an investigation into the reported theft of a diary belonging to Ashley Biden, President Joe Biden’s daughter, The New York Times reported.
According to a statement published on Project Veritas’ website, the search came two days after raids had taken place at the homes of multiple individuals affiliated with the group, which describes itself as a non-profit investigative organization. The group is known for its hidden-camera sting operations that typically target liberal politicians and nonprofits, as well as news organizations including CNN and NPR.
O’Keefe, who did not respond to an emailed request for comment, said in an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity that the agents arrived at his home before dawn, placed him in handcuffs, seized two of his iPhones and searched his apartment for more than two hours.
“On my phone were many of my reporter's notes, a lot of my sources unrelated to this story and a lot of confidential information to our news organization,” O’Keefe said. “If they can do this to me, if they can do this to this journalist and raid my home and take my reporter notes, they’ll do it to any journalist.”
In the Fox News interview, Paul Calli, one of the attorneys representing O’Keefe, said the search warrant cited misprision of — or knowingly helping to conceal — a felony, accessory after the fact and transporting materials across state lines as the basis of the warrant.
Calli denied allegations that his client or Project Veritas was involved in the theft of Biden’s diary. O’Keefe confirmed that Project Veritas was approached by individuals claiming to possess the diary in 2020, but said in his statement that they had declined to publish its contents and had turned the diary over to law enforcement.
“It appears the Southern District of New York now has journalists in their sights for the supposed ‘crime’ of doing their jobs lawfully and honestly,” O’Keefe said, in reference to the judicial district in Manhattan. “Our efforts were the stuff of responsible, ethical journalism and we are in no doubt that Project Veritas acted properly at each and every step.”
Trevor Timm, the executive director of Freedom of the Press Foundation, where the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker is housed, wrote on Twitter that the raid of O’Keefe’s home was concerning.
“This is worrying from a press freedom perspective—unless & until DOJ releases evidence [Project] Veritas was directly involved in the theft,” Timm wrote. “Because if there is none, then the raids could very well be a violation of the Privacy Protection Act.”
The Privacy Protection Act of 1980 states that a state and federal law enforcement cannot search for or seize journalistic work product or documentary materials under claims of probable cause if the alleged offense consists of the receipt, possession, communication or withholding of the materials or the information they contain.
“If you take it as true that they were given this diary by someone unknown to them and they chose not to publish it, this is kind of a classic journalistic situation,” said Jane Kirtley, a University of Minnesota law professor and former executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. “And what law enforcement should have done is issue a subpoena.”
Kirtley told the Tracker she agreed that regardless of the debates surrounding Project Veritas’ methods, the raid of O’Keefe’s home and the seizure of his phone could set a dangerous precedent.
“When we get in the business of government trying to decide when someone is a journalist and when someone isn’t, there’s always a danger that some definitions will be narrow and they will weed out a lot of people who deserve to have journalistic protections,” Kirtley said. “As troublesome as I find Project Veritas’ activities — and again, I do not defend any illegal conduct on their part at all — that is a separate question from whether or not they should be protected by these laws. And if they aren’t then I think all journalists are at risk.”
Another O’Keefe attorney, Harmeet Dhillon, told the Tracker that agents had executed the warrant despite O’Keefe’s attorneys having “indicated a willingness to cooperate and provide any information necessary.”
Dhillon tweeted on Nov. 11 that District Court Judge Analisa Torres had ordered that the Department of Justice halt its review of O’Keefe’s phones pending a ruling on their request for a special master — typically a retired judge without ties to the case — to be appointed to oversee the search of the devices.
"We are gratified that the Department of Justice has been ordered to stop extracting and reviewing confidential and privileged information obtained in their raids of our reporters, including legal, donor, and confidential source communications," Dhillon told Fox News.
In a statement released on Nov. 14, Brian Hauss of the American Civil Liberties Union expressed concern for the precedent that could be set by the case and urged the court to appoint a special master.
“Project Veritas has engaged in disgraceful deceptions, and reasonable observers might not consider their activities to be journalism at all,” wrote Hauss, who is a senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. “Nevertheless, the precedent set in this case could have serious consequences for press freedom. Unless the government had good reason to believe that Project Veritas employees were directly involved in the criminal theft of the diary, it should not have subjected them to invasive searches and seizures.”
As of publication date, the court had not yet ruled on a special master.
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York told the Tracker it does not provide comment on pending cases.
For the purposes of the Tracker, O’Keefe identifies as a journalist, has a track record of publication and said the phones seized by the FBI contained his reporter’s notes. For more about how the Tracker counts incidents, see our frequently asked questions page.
Project Veritas founder James O'Keefe, speaking here at the Conservative Political Action Conference in early 2021, was detained by FBI agents at his home and his phones seized on Nov. 6.
",detained and released without being processed,FBI,None,None,False,None,[],None,in custody,True,law enforcement,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,Journalist,warrant,Federal,None,False,None,,Department of Justice,,, 2020-12-01 21:09:18.138672+00:00,2024-02-29 17:35:07.516417+00:00,"Student photojournalist arrested, equipment seized during LA protest",https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/student-photojournalist-arrested-equipment-seized-during-l-protest/,2024-02-29 17:35:07.366429+00:00,rioting: failure to disperse (charges dropped as of 2021-03-01),LegalOrder object (238),"(2021-03-01 19:07:00+00:00) Charges dropped against LA student photojournalist; some equipment still not returned, (2022-09-18 13:57:00+00:00) LA photojournalist receives $90,000 settlement in lawsuit against the county, sheriff’s department, (2023-05-18 16:08:00+00:00) Photojournalist’s phone searched after arrest, warrant confirms, (2021-10-22 00:00:00+00:00) LA student photojournalist sues the county, sheriff’s department following arrest and loss of equipment","Arrest/Criminal Charge, Assault, Equipment Search or Seizure, Subpoena/Legal Order",,"camera: count of 1, cellphone: count of 1, storage device: count of 1",,Pablo Unzueta (Daily Forty-Niner),,2020-09-08,False,Los Angeles,California (CA),34.05223,-118.24368,"Pablo Unzueta, a freelance photojournalist and video editor for California State University, Long Beach’s newspaper, the Daily Forty-Niner, was arrested while documenting protests in the South Los Angeles area on Sept. 8, 2020.
Unzueta told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker he was following a group of protesters as they gathered for the fourth consecutive night outside the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department following the fatal shooting of Dijon Kizzee, a Black man, by deputies on Aug. 31.
At approximately 8:30 p.m. on Sept. 8, Unzueta said, deputies declared the protest unlawful and ordered the crowd to disperse. Following the order, Unzueta said he saw deputies firing tear gas and flash-bang grenades into the crowd around the intersection of Normandie Avenue and West Imperial Highway.
Unzueta said officers pushed the crowd north on Normandie as they advanced, and that many of the protesters began splitting off and dispersing.
“I didn’t know the area that well so I made a left into this neighborhood on this very narrow street,” Unzueta said. “The sheriffs would get on the trucks and then the truck would speed up through the street and then they would start firing more [flash-bang grenades] and then more tear gas.”
“I kept ducking behind cars while I’m running so I wouldn’t get hit.”
Unzueta said a few minutes passed as he kept looking for a way to get back to his car, which was parked near the Sheriff’s Department, but realized that he was stuck on a long, narrow block.
Two sheriff’s vehicles pulled up at approximately 9:30 p.m., Unzueta said, and deputies began arresting the demonstrators that remained.
“This was sort of a ‘holy shit’ moment for me, and I immediately identified myself as press just to avoid getting tackled or being shot with a rubber bullet,” Unzueta said.
He said that after a couple of deputies saw his credentials and camera and didn’t stop him, he thought he would be allowed to leave and began to head back the way they had come to return to his vehicle.
“I start walking on the sidewalk and that’s when an officer from up above in the truck said, ‘Hey! Grab that guy!,’” Unzueta said. “Again I yelled, ‘Press, press, press!’ And that’s when the officer...just grabbed me, threw my camera on the ground and ripped my backpack off my back.”
Unzueta told the Tracker he was wearing press credentials from Mt. San Antonio College, where Unzueta used to be a student, and his College Media Association badge, and repeatedly told the deputies to call the newspaper’s adviser.
During the course of his arrest, Unzueta said that officers tightened his metal handcuffs so tightly that he lost all feeling in his hands, and that they called him demeaning names and slurs. Unzueta said deputies then pushed him into the back of a department van, causing him to fall on and rupture multiple pepper balls. The officers left him to struggle to breathe amid clouds of pepper powder, he said.
Unzueta also alleges that some of the officers used their personal cellphones to photograph him and other detainees.
“The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department values the media and highly respects the freedom of the press,” Department spokesperson Deputy Trina Schrader told the Tracker in an emailed statement. “Please be aware an administrative investigation has been launched into the circumstances surrounding this incident. A lieutenant from South Los Angeles Station has been assigned and will be contacting Mr. Unzueta to investigate these allegations.”
Unzueta said deputies seized his iPhone and Nikon D800 camera. He said he was handcuffed for about two hours. He was transported to the South Los Angeles Sheriff’s Station where he was booked at 10:30 p.m., and then transferred to the Twin Towers Correctional Facility in downtown Los Angeles.
Unzueta estimated he was in police custody for 10 or 11 hours. His booking data, reviewed by the Tracker, shows he was released the following day with a citation. A copy of the citation shared with the Tracker shows Unzueta was arrested for unlawful assembly, a misdemeanor, and was ordered to appear in court two days later.
Unzueta said his equipment and cellphone weren’t returned to him upon his release.
The Student Press Law Center, a Tracker partner organization, connected Unzueta with the Criminal Justice Clinic at the University of California, Irvine School of Law. LAist, part of Southern California Public Radio, reported that the clinic was able to secure the release of Unzueta’s camera, but the memory card — which Unzueta told the Tracker contained two years worth of freelance work — had been removed.
Unzueta said deputies first claimed that the camera hadn’t contained an SD card and then that it may have fallen out when the deputy threw it to the ground during the arrest. Unzueta disputed both of these assertions, and said the design of the camera makes it nearly impossible for the memory card to fall out.
In a letter sent on Unzueta’s behalf, the clinic asked that the cellphone and memory card be returned and for assurance that the case wouldn’t be presented to the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office for prosecution, a copy of his arrest report and an apology from the department.
“Sheriff’s deputies had no basis to arrest Mr. Unzueta,” the letter reads. “A truck full of deputies passed by, and a deputy pointed at Mr. Unzueta and said, ‘Get him.’ Mr. Unzueta repeatedly identified himself as a member of the press and as a student journalist, displaying his student press badge, but the deputy who arrested him ignored him.”
Unzueta confirmed to the Tracker that he still hasn’t regained complete feeling in his palms more than two and a half months later, attributing the numbness to the overly tight handcuffs.
The Long Beach Press Telegram reported on Nov. 17 that the department hadn’t responded to the letter, according to one of Unzueta’s lawyers.
“I’ve been photographing protests since the Trayvon Martin protest, which was in 2013 and I was 17 at the time. I’ve been doing this a long time, and I never thought I’d have to experience something like I experienced on September 8th,” Unzueta said.
Unzueta told the Long Beach Post that while he has always had a passion for photography, he was shaken by the incident.
“I don’t feel safe going out anymore,” Unzueta said. “This is the last thing I want to do.”
Livestreamer Hugo Padilla was allegedly struck with crowd-control munitions and assaulted by law enforcement before being arrested while documenting protests in Los Angeles, California, on Sept. 8, 2020. Deputies later obtained a search warrant for one of his cellphones.
Padilla subsequently joined as a plaintiff in a lawsuit with three others in October 2020 against the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, Los Angeles County and then-Sheriff Alex Villanueva, alleging violations of his Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
Colleen Flynn, an attorney representing Padilla, told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker that Padilla attended the protest to broadcast it on his YouTube channel, Alien Alphabet, while providing audio narration.
Protesters had gathered outside the South Los Angeles Sheriff's Station following the Aug. 31 fatal shooting of Dijon Kizzee, a Black man, by deputies in a nearby neighborhood.
Flynn said that Padilla began filming the demonstration from the parking lot of a nearby 7-Eleven, and confirmed to the Tracker that throughout the protest Padilla was wearing a black bicycle helmet with “PRESS” written in silver lettering on multiple sides.
Approximately an hour into the protest, deputies declared the protest unlawful and ordered the crowd to disperse. According to the lawsuit, officers began to advance on the demonstrators and shortly after fired crowd-control munitions. The crowd dispersed and many individuals — including Padilla — fled into the neighborhood.
In Padilla’s livestream from the protest, he said that he was attempting to circle around to the far side of the crowd, but as he did, a law enforcement helicopter shined a searchlight on him. Within seconds and without warning, Padilla was shot with a crowd-control munition, he said.
The lawsuit claimed the hard projectile struck Padilla in the knee, knocking him off his bicycle and onto the ground. Deputies then “jumped” on him and one of them punched him in the face, splitting his lip, Flynn said. Padilla was tightly handcuffed — his lawsuit states that restraint marks were still visible weeks later — and forced into the back of a large truck where loose pepper ball munitions caused his eyes to water painfully.
According to Flynn, Padilla had no opportunity to identify himself verbally as press before he was arrested, but he did tell deputies he was a journalist while in the truck and in an interrogation room.
Padilla’s bicycle was seized, as was his personal iPhone, which was booked into evidence and later searched. But a Samsung cellphone Padilla was using to livestream fell from his hand and, his suit claimed, deputies did not retrieve it.
Flynn told the Tracker that she believed deputies deliberately left Padilla’s phone and that of freelance photographer Julianna Lacoste, who is also her client, because they were livestreaming.
“It appears that the deputies that abandoned Mr. Padilla and Ms. Lacoste's cell phones on the street while they were livestreaming did so to get rid of the evidence that may have recorded their actions, including their use of excessive force and violation of my clients' constitutional rights,” Flynn wrote in an email.
Padilla’s lawsuit states that once he arrived at the South Los Angeles Sheriff's Station, some of the officers used personal cellphones to photograph Padilla and the other detainees while laughing. Lacoste and student journalist Pablo Unzueta, who were also arrested that evening, said the same.
Padilla was ultimately released from a county jail in downtown LA midmorning the following day with a citation for failure to disperse. His wallet, headphones and a set of keys — not his — were returned to him; the remainder of his equipment was not. Deputies ultimately returned Padilla’s bicycle in December 2020 and his iPhone in June 2021; his bicycle helmet was never returned.
When Padilla appeared for his hearing date at the Inglewood Courthouse on Sept. 11, 2020, according to his lawsuit, a court clerk told him that no charges had been filed.
Sheriff's Deputy Trina Schrader, a spokesperson for the department, told the Tracker in the days following the protest that an investigation had been launched into the events that day. “The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department values the media and highly respects the freedom of the press,” she added.
The day following the protest, sheriff’s deputies obtained a search warrant for cellphones belonging to more than a dozen individuals, including Padilla. The search warrant and an affidavit in support of the warrant were only released in May 2023, more than 2 1/2 years after the incident, and following an August 2022 motion to unseal filed by the First Amendment Coalition and independent news organization Knock LA.
The media organizations said that the sheriff’s department had fought the release of the materials for more than two years, in violation of California state law and the First Amendment. The release only came after Villanueva was ousted in a November 2022 election and replaced by Robert Luna, who acceded to the unsealing.
Susan E. Seager of the UC Irvine School of Law, who represented Knock LA and FAC in the case, said the timing shows that the department never had a good reason to seal the warrants in the first place.
Photos accompanying the warrant materials included the helmet marked “PRESS,” which Padilla’s attorney confirmed belonged to him. FAC noted in a later statement that police records confirmed that the LASD knew journalists were included as targets, which raises press rights concerns.
“Those photos, along with the fact [the] journalists have said they verbally identified themselves as press, should have put pause on the probe or, at a minimum, prompted the department to make disclosures to the judge to ensure press rights were protected,” the FAC statement said.
David Snyder, executive director of FAC, also commented: “While we are grateful the public can finally see these documents, they should have been able to do so long ago. There can be no real accountability without knowledge – what did the police tell the judge who issued this warrant? Now this crucial question can be answered, and accountability for any unjustified arrest and seizure can at long last begin.”
Editor’s Note: This article has been updated to include additional details concerning the seizure and return of some of Padilla’s equipment.
Livestreamer Hugo Padilla, extreme left, filmed multiple protests outside a Los Angeles Sheriff’s station in 2020. During a Sept. 8 protest, he claims deputies shot him with a munition, then arrested him and seized his equipment.
",arrested and released,Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department,2020-09-09,2020-09-08,True,2:20-cv-09805,['ONGOING'],Civil,returned in part,True,law enforcement,None,None,False,False,None,None,law enforcement,unknown,False,None,None,None,None,Journalist,warrant,State,None,False,None,,"Black Lives Matter, Black Lives Matter 1 year, Black Lives Matter 2020, chemical irritant, protest, shot / shot at",,, 2020-04-14 19:33:58.549517+00:00,2024-02-29 19:43:41.963134+00:00,Liberty University obtains trespassing warrants against two journalists,https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/liberty-university-obtains-trespassing-warrants-against-two-journalists/,2024-02-29 19:43:41.852709+00:00,trespassing (charges dropped as of 2020-05-15),LegalOrder object (98),(2020-05-15 13:50:00+00:00) Criminal charges against two journalists dropped,"Arrest/Criminal Charge, Subpoena/Legal Order",,,,Julia Rendleman (The New York Times),,2020-04-06,False,Lynchburg,Virginia (VA),37.41375,-79.14225,"Arrest warrants were issued on April 6, 2020, for two journalists after they visited Liberty University to cover the school's decision to invite students back to campus following spring break during the coronavirus pandemic.
Virginia Magistrate Kang Lee signed the misdemeanor arrest warrants, which were sought by the Liberty University Police Department against ProPublica's Alec MacGillis, who wrote a March 26 report about students who returned to the university's Lynchburg, Virginia, campus, and Julia Rendleman, a freelance photographer on assignment for The New York Times whose photos accompanied a March 29 story in the newspaper. A warrant was not issued for the author of the Times piece, Elizabeth Williamson, as university officials had not located eyewitnesses placing her on campus, University President Jerry Falwell Jr. told The Associated Press.
Falwell has faced criticism of downplaying the risk posed by the coronavirus and being slow to halt in-person classes at the school. Around 1,000 students remain on campus. In MacGillis' ProPublica piece, "What’s It Like on One of the Only University Campuses Still Open in the U.S.?" he describes many examples of students on campus not adhering to social distancing guidelines and students and faculty worried about their personal safety.
The decision whether to prosecute will be up to Lynchburg Commonwealth’s Attorney Bethany Harrison, according to the AP. "Once I receive copies of the served warrants, obtain reports from the Liberty University Police Department, conduct any necessary follow up investigation, and thoroughly research the applicable statutes and case law, I will make a final decision about how to proceed," Harrison said in a news release. Under Virginia law criminal trespassing is a class one misdemeanor, carrying a sentence of up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $2,500.
"We have heard nothing about this warrant from either Liberty or any authority of the Commonwealth of Virginia," ProPublica President Richard Tofel wrote in an email to the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker. "We have also still never heard any suggestion from Liberty that anything in our story was factually inaccurate. We continue to believe this was a story of significant public interest about the greatest public health crisis of our time."
Eileen Murphy, a Times spokesperson, decried the decision to seek a warrant for someone taking photos for a news story in a statement to the Lynchburg News & Advance. "We are disappointed that Liberty University would decide to make that into a criminal case and go after a freelance journalist because its officials were unhappy with press coverage of the university's decision to reopen campus in the midst of the pandemic," Murphy said.
Falwell announced the warrants in an April 8 appearance on the Todd Starnes radio show and accused the reporters of putting students at risk by coming onto campus from known hot spots.
"To us it's so hypocritical for them to come to a campus that is doing everything right — social distancing, take-out food only, protecting our students who have no place else to go and no classes — and to come on our campus from New York or Washington or wherever the hotspot is that they come from and put our students at risk," he said.
Falwell shared a letter with the Washington Examiner that Liberty University lawyers have sent to the general counsel of the Times seeking a retraction.
Liberty University has been roundly criticized by press freedom advocates for obtaining the warrants.
Katie Townsend, legal director for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said in a statement that journalists should not face retaliation or threats of criminal penalties for routine newsgathering.
“These arrest warrants appear to be intended to harass journalists who were simply, and rightly, doing their jobs — reporting on the impact of Liberty University’s decision to partially reopen during a pandemic — and to intimidate other reporters from doing the same type of reporting," Townsend said.
The Virginia chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists also issued a statement, writing, “The journalists were reporting about a health crisis of public interest and importance, and doing so in a professional and responsible manner. By pursuing criminal charges, Liberty University has cast a chilling effect on newsgathering activities vital to a free and democratic society.”
The Washington Post editorial board weighed in on April 12, comparing the move against the journalists as a tactic favored by authoritarian strongmen abroad. "But it is more than a little jarring to see this tactic of criminalizing journalism being employed in the United States — and by a university whose name celebrates American freedom," the editorial said.
The AP also reported that a Liberty University campus security officer asked one of its photographers to leave campus and delete the photos he had taken there on March 24. After speaking to his supervisor, the photographer complied, a decision the AP now says was incorrect. “We don’t delete photos or any other material at the request of an individual law enforcement officer,” said Sally Buzbee, the AP’s executive editor and senior vice president. “We try to fight such orders legally.”
Portions of two trespassing warrants against a ProPublica reporter and a New York Times freelance photographer following coverage of Liberty University's decision to remain partially open during the COVID-19 pandemic.
",charged without arrest,Liberty University Police Department,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,False,None,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,Journalist,warrant,State,None,False,[],,coronavirus,,, 2021-04-29 20:07:01.590633+00:00,2024-02-29 19:45:04.057793+00:00,Liberty University obtains trespassing warrant against ProPublica reporter,https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/liberty-university-obtains-trespassing-warrant-against-propublica-reporter/,2024-02-29 19:45:03.892193+00:00,trespassing (charges dropped as of 2020-05-15),LegalOrder object (97),(2020-05-15 15:06:00+00:00) Criminal charges against two journalists dropped,"Arrest/Criminal Charge, Subpoena/Legal Order",,,,Alec MacGillis (ProPublica),,2020-04-06,False,Lynchburg,Virginia (VA),37.41375,-79.14225,"Arrest warrants were issued on April 6, 2020, for two journalists after they visited Liberty University to cover the school's decision to invite students back to campus following spring break during the coronavirus pandemic.
Virginia Magistrate Kang Lee signed the misdemeanor arrest warrants, which were sought by the Liberty University Police Department against ProPublica's Alec MacGillis, who wrote a March 26 report about students who returned to the university's Lynchburg, Virginia, campus, and Julia Rendleman, a freelance photographer on assignment for The New York Times whose photos accompanied a March 29 story in the newspaper. A warrant was not issued for the author of the Times piece, Elizabeth Williamson, as university officials had not located eyewitnesses placing her on campus, University President Jerry Falwell Jr. told The Associated Press.
Falwell has faced criticism of downplaying the risk posed by the coronavirus and being slow to halt in-person classes at the school. Around 1,000 students remain on campus. In MacGillis' ProPublica piece, "What’s It Like on One of the Only University Campuses Still Open in the U.S.?" he describes many examples of students on campus not adhering to social distancing guidelines and students and faculty worried about their personal safety.
The decision whether to prosecute will be up to Lynchburg Commonwealth’s Attorney Bethany Harrison, according to the AP. "Once I receive copies of the served warrants, obtain reports from the Liberty University Police Department, conduct any necessary follow up investigation, and thoroughly research the applicable statutes and case law, I will make a final decision about how to proceed," Harrison said in a news release. Under Virginia law criminal trespassing is a class one misdemeanor, carrying a sentence of up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $2,500.
"We have heard nothing about this warrant from either Liberty or any authority of the Commonwealth of Virginia," ProPublica President Richard Tofel wrote in an email to the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker. "We have also still never heard any suggestion from Liberty that anything in our story was factually inaccurate. We continue to believe this was a story of significant public interest about the greatest public health crisis of our time."
Eileen Murphy, a Times spokesperson, decried the decision to seek a warrant for someone taking photos for a news story in a statement to the Lynchburg News & Advance.
"We are disappointed that Liberty University would decide to make that into a criminal case and go after a freelance journalist because its officials were unhappy with press coverage of the university's decision to reopen campus in the midst of the pandemic," Murphy said.
Falwell announced the warrants in an April 8 appearance on the Todd Starnes radio show and accused the reporters of putting students at risk by coming onto campus from known hot spots.
"To us it's so hypocritical for them to come to a campus that is doing everything right — social distancing, take-out food only, protecting our students who have no place else to go and no classes — and to come on our campus from New York or Washington or wherever the hotspot is that they come from and put our students at risk," he said.
Falwell shared a letter with the Washington Examiner that Liberty University lawyers have sent to the general counsel of the Times seeking a retraction.
Liberty University has been roundly criticized by press freedom advocates for obtaining the warrants.
Katie Townsend, legal director for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said in a statement that journalists should not face retaliation or threats of criminal penalties for routine newsgathering.
“These arrest warrants appear to be intended to harass journalists who were simply, and rightly, doing their jobs — reporting on the impact of Liberty University’s decision to partially reopen during a pandemic — and to intimidate other reporters from doing the same type of reporting," Townsend said.
The Virginia chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists also issued a statement, writing, “The journalists were reporting about a health crisis of public interest and importance, and doing so in a professional and responsible manner. By pursuing criminal charges, Liberty University has cast a chilling effect on newsgathering activities vital to a free and democratic society.”
The Washington Post editorial board weighed in on April 12, comparing the move against the journalists as a tactic favored by authoritarian strongmen abroad. "But it is more than a little jarring to see this tactic of criminalizing journalism being employed in the United States — and by a university whose name celebrates American freedom," the editorial said.
The AP also reported that a Liberty University campus security officer asked one of its photographers to leave campus and delete the photos he had taken there on March 24. After speaking to his supervisor, the photographer complied, a decision the AP now says was incorrect. “We don’t delete photos or any other material at the request of an individual law enforcement officer,” said Sally Buzbee, the AP’s executive editor and senior vice president. “We try to fight such orders legally.”
Portions of two trespassing warrants by Liberty University against two journalists following their coverage of the university's decision to remain partially open during the coronavirus pandemic
",charged without arrest,Liberty University Police Department,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,False,None,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,Journalist,warrant,State,None,False,[],,coronavirus,,, 2019-05-14 16:31:23.663401+00:00,2024-01-12 16:38:06.390891+00:00,"San Francisco police use search warrant to raid home, office of independent journalist",https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/san-francisco-police-use-search-warrant-raid-home-office-independent-journalist-source-material/,2024-01-12 16:38:06.212620+00:00,,"LegalOrder object (56), LegalOrder object (57), LegalOrder object (58)","(2020-03-03 10:29:00+00:00) San Francisco to pay $369,000 following raids of journalist Bryan Carmody, (2020-05-26 14:52:00+00:00) San Francisco police agree to inform officers of press protections following raid, (2019-05-21 14:02:00+00:00) Equipment seized in raid returned to Carmody, (2019-08-02 16:15:00+00:00) San Francisco judges quash three more warrants used in raid of independent journalist Bryan Carmody's home, office and phone records","Arrest/Criminal Charge, Equipment Search or Seizure, Subpoena/Legal Order",,"camera: count of 2, cellphone: count of 12, computer: count of 11, storage device: count of 11, work product: count of 3",,Bryan Carmody (North Bay News),,2019-05-10,False,San Francisco,California (CA),37.77493,-122.41942,"On May 10, 2019, San Francisco police officers raided the home and office of freelance journalist Bryan Carmody as part of an investigation into one of Carmody’s confidential sources.
Carmody told the Los Angeles Times that he awoke to 10 or so officers from the San Francisco Police Department banging on his front gate with a sledgehammer. He said he allowed them in after being shown a search warrant signed by a state court judge. The SFPD officers then handcuffed him and searched his house with guns drawn.
Carmody was not formally arrested or charged with any crime, but he was detained for more than five hours. When he was finally released, the SFPD gave him a receipt showing that he had been in police custody from 8:22 a.m. to 1:55 p.m.
While Carmody was in SFPD custody, two FBI agents asked to interview him, but he refused and requested an attorney. An FBI spokeswoman later told the Times that the FBI agents were not involved in the search of Carmody’s house. Technically speaking, Carmody was only raided by the SFPD, not by federal agents.
During the raid on Carmody’s house, the SFPD learned that Carmody also used a separate office space for his independent media company, North Bay News, and quickly obtained a search warrant for the office space, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
In the end, the officers who searched Carmody’s house ended up seizing multiple notebooks, computers, phones, and cameras, while those who searched his office seized a USB thumb drive, multiple CDs, and a copy of a confidential police report into the death of San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi.
A source had leaked that police report to Carmody shortly after Adachi died unexpectedly on Feb. 22. The police report included salacious details about Adachi’s drug use and possible extramarital affair, and Carmody used the leaked report as the centerpiece of a story about Adachi’s death. Carmody sold his story on Adachi’s death to local TV news stations, who ran segments about it.
Progressive politicians roundly condemned the sensationalist coverage of Adachi’s death and accused the SFPD of deliberately leaking the police report to the media in order to smear Adachi, who had been a frequent critic of the police department. The SFPD also condemned the leak and pledged to track down the source of the police report.
According to the Chronicle, SFPD Captain William Braconi testified during a special hearing in April that the police department had launched both an internal administrative probe and a criminal investigation into the leak.
A few weeks before the May 10 raid, two San Francisco police officers visited Carmody and asked him to identify the source who had leaked him a copy of the police report. Carmody refused. Carmody told the California Globe that when he refused, the officers warned him that if he did not identify his source, then he could be subject to a federal grand jury subpoena.
But Carmody never received a subpoena, either from a federal grand jury or a state prosecutor, which he could have contested in court. Instead, a state court judge secretly authorized the SFPD to raid his house and seize his devices.
David Stevenson, a spokesman for the SFPD, said that the raid on Carmody was part of the SFPD’s criminal investigation.
“The citizens and leaders of the City of San Francisco have demanded a complete and thorough investigation into this leak, and this action represents a step in the process of investigating a potential case of obstruction of justice along with the illegal distribution of confidential police material,” he told the Times.
According to the Times, two judges of the San Francisco Superior Court — Gail Dekreon and Victor Hwang — approved the warrants to search Carmody’s house and office, respectively.
It is not clear who requested the warrants. A spokeswoman for the San Francisco district attorney’s office told the Times that the office was not involved in preparing the warrants.
Nor is it clear whether Dekreon and Hwang knew that Carmody was a journalist when they authorized the searches of his house and office space
Thomas Burke, an attorney at Davis Wright & Tremaine who is representing Carmody, said that the raid violated Carmody’s First Amendment rights. He told the Times that the investigators should have issued a subpoena for the records they wanted from Carmody, rather than raiding his newsroom and seizing documents unrelated to the investigation.
“So much information has nothing to do with the purpose of their investigation,” he said. “If you are looking for one piece of information, that’s why you issue a subpoena.”
San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi, who died in February, speaks with reporters. Police raided the home and office of journalist Bryan Carmody, seeking the source of a confidential police report about Adachi’s death.
",detained and released without being processed,San Francisco Police Department,None,None,False,None,[],None,returned in full,True,law enforcement,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,Journalist,warrant,State,None,False,[],,,,, 2019-06-11 14:04:17.351126+00:00,2023-03-14 21:39:24.736745+00:00,San Francisco police seize multiple phone records of independent journalist Bryan Carmody,https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/san-francisco-police-seize-multiple-phone-records-independent-journalist-bryan-carmody/,2023-03-14 21:39:24.615220+00:00,,"LegalOrder object (50), LegalOrder object (51)","(2019-07-18 12:00:00+00:00) Judge quashes warrant used to seize phone records, (2020-05-26 14:51:00+00:00) San Francisco police agree to inform officers of press protections following raid, (2019-08-16 12:31:00+00:00) Judge quashes final warrant used in search of Bryan Carmody’s phone records, (2020-03-03 10:36:00+00:00) San Francisco to pay $369,000 for illegal raids of journalist Bryan Carmody, (2019-08-02 16:20:00+00:00) San Francisco judges quash three more warrants used in raid of independent journalist Bryan Carmody home, office and phone records",Subpoena/Legal Order,,,,Bryan Carmody (North Bay News),,2019-03-01,False,San Francisco,California (CA),37.77493,-122.41942,"In March and April 2019, San Francisco police seized phone records for freelance journalist Bryan Carmody as part of an investigation into one of Carmody’s confidential sources.
On May 31, the San Francisco Police Department formally notified Carmody that it had obtained a warrant to seize his mobile phone records. In a letter to Carmody, SFPD Sgt. Joseph Obidi wrote: “Mr. Carmody is being investigated as a co-conspirator in the theft of the San Francisco Police report, involving the death investigation of Jeff Adachi.”
Adachi, the San Francisco Public Defender, died unexpectedly on Feb. 22. Shortly after, Carmody obtained a copy of an SFPD report into Adachi’s death. The police report included salacious details about Adachi’s drug use and possible extramarital affair, and Carmody used the leaked report as the centerpiece of a story about Adachi’s death. Carmody sold his story on Adachi’s death to local TV news stations, who ran segments about the police report.
Sgt. Obidi’s May 31 letter to Carmody stated that the SFPD had executed a search warrant on March 1 to compel Verizon to turn over Carmody’s mobile phone records, including “subscriber information, call detail records, SMS usage, mobile data usage, cell tower data,” for the period of time between 8:33 p.m. on Feb. 22 and 10:44 p.m. on Feb. 23.
On June 1, Carmody received two more letters from Sgt. Obidi, notifying him that police had executed further warrants on March 13 and April 16 for his mobile phone records.
The March 13 warrant, like the earlier one executed on March 1, requested Verizon hand over Carmody’s mobile phone records for the same time period—between 8:33 p.m. on Feb. 22 and 10:44 p.m. on Feb. 23.
The April 16 warrant was served on both Verizon and AT&T and requested that the two carriers hand over mobile phone records for three different phone numbers for the time period between 1:13 p.m. on April 12 and 11:59 p.m. on April 15.
In addition to the warrants to seize Carmody’s mobile phone records, the SFPD obtained search warrants for Carmody’s home and office. On May 10, SFPD officers raided Carmody’s home and office and the reporter’s notebooks, computers, phones, and cameras.
Through a certified letter after the fact, independent journalist Bryan Carmody learned of three separate search warrants executed on his phone records by the San Francisco police department.
",None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,False,None,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,[],"Verizon, AT&T",telecom company,Third-party,warrant,State,None,False,None,,,,, 2018-02-02 06:29:17.861944+00:00,2022-11-09 17:00:52.886952+00:00,Documentary journalist Nora Donaghy subpoenaed to testify before grand jury,https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/documentary-journalist-nora-donaghy-subpoenaed-testify-grand-jury/,2022-11-09 17:00:52.793655+00:00,,"LegalOrder object (15), LegalOrder object (16)",(2018-02-06 12:00:00+00:00) LAT update,"Subpoena/Legal Order, Equipment Search or Seizure","Two TV Journalists Fight Grand Jury Subpoena After Interviewing Suge Knight in Prison (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/two-tv-journalists-fight-grand-jury-subpoena-interviewing-suge-knight-prison-1077357) via The Hollywood Reporter, Prosecutors use aggressive tactics against Suge Knight and his team, sparking civil liberties concerns (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-suge-knight-tactics-20180206-story.html) via Los Angeles Times",cellphone: count of 1,,Nora Donaghy (eOne),,2018-01-18,False,Los Angeles,California (CA),34.05223,-118.24368,"Nora Donaghy, a journalist and producer working on a documentary series about controversial record producer Marion “Suge” Knight, had her phone seized and searched by two police officers on Jan. 18, 2018, according to a sealed declaration filed in court and obtained by The Hollywood Reporter. She has also been subpoenaed to testify in front of a grand jury about her interview with Knight.
That morning, two police officers visited Donaghy at her home in Los Angeles and presented her with a search warrant, according to a declaration that she filed with the court. The declaration was filed under seal but obtained by THR.
"One of the officers told me that I was required by the warrant to hand over my cellphone,” Donaghy wrote in the declaration. “They also asked me for my passcode and asked me to type the passcode into the phone in their presence to make sure it worked. Believing I had no alternative and frightened by the unexpected arrival of two homicide officers at my home, early in the morning, I gave them my iPhone and the passcode and showed them it worked.”
In the declaration, Donaghy stated that her phone contained "highly sensitive" information, including unpublished work and communications about sources.
THR reports that Donaghy and a colleague, William Erb, are documentary filmmakers working on a six-part series about Death Row Records, the rap label that Knight co-founded. The two interviewed Knight in prison for the documentary series, which is being produced by eOne and will air later this year on the BET network.
In 2015, Knight was arrested and charged with murder after a fatal hit-and-run collision on a movie set that killed his friend Terry Carter. Knight has also been suspected of involvement in the unsolved 1996 murder of rapper Tupac Shakur, who was signed to his label, and the 1997 murder of rapper Biggie Smalls. THR reports that Donaghy and Erb interviewed Knight about the Tupac murder for the upcoming BET series.
According to THR, Donaghy and Erb have been subpoenaed to testify in front of a grand jury about the interview with Knight, and attorneys representing the filmmakers have filed a motion to quash the subpoena, arguing that California’s shield law prevents the state from forcing journalists to testify about their work.
“This is the kind of gross overreaching that California's shield law and related provisions have been designed to prevent,” the motion to quash the subpoena states, according to THR.
On Jan. 26, THR reporter Eriq Gardner reported on Twitter that the judge overseeing the case ruled on the motion to quash, but the judge's ruling was not made public.
A quick update on this. There has been a ruling, but the judge has ordered the entire thing under seal so unclear the result. Will update further when I know more. https://t.co/mtTXxljQgb
— Eriq Gardner (@eriqgardner) January 26, 2018
Rap mogul Suge Knight appears in court for a arraignment hearing in his murder trial in Los Angeles, California, on April 30, 2015.
",None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,returned in full,True,law enforcement,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,other testimony,['UNKNOWN'],None,None,Journalist,warrant,State,None,False,None,,,,, 2018-01-16 11:18:12.499836+00:00,2024-02-23 15:37:30.329214+00:00,Citizen journalist arrested for publishing information before local police,https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/citizen-journalist-arrested-after-publishing-information-local-police/,2024-02-23 15:37:30.203400+00:00,"misuse of official information (charges dropped as of 2018-03-28), misuse of official information (charges dropped as of 2018-03-28)",LegalOrder object (11),"(2018-03-28 13:51:00+00:00) Charges dismissed, (2019-04-08 14:41:00+00:00) Citizen journalist sues for damages following alleged unlawful 2017 arrest, (2021-11-01 00:00:00+00:00) Court of Appeals overturns ruling dismissing citizen journalist’s lawsuit, (2024-01-23 11:56:00+00:00) Divided federal appeals court won’t revive Texas journalist’s lawsuit","Arrest/Criminal Charge, Subpoena/Legal Order",,,,Priscilla Villarreal (Independent),,2017-12-13,False,Laredo,Texas (TX),27.50641,-99.50754,"Citizen journalist Priscilla Villarreal was arrested by the Laredo Police Department and charged with two felony counts of “misuse of official information” on Dec. 13, 2017.
Villarreal — an independent journalist based in Laredo, Texas, who is often known by her nickname “La Gordiloca” — published the name of a Border Patrol agent who died by suicide on her Facebook page in April, before the Laredo Police Department’s official release about the incident.
The Laredo Morning Times reported on Dec. 15 that a veteran patrol officer, Barbara J. Goodman, provided the name of the agent to Villarreal, but the journalist denies Goodman was her source. Investigators obtained subpoenas for the phone records of both Villarreal and Goodman.
“Misuse of official information” charges in Texas require that a person obtain nonpublic information from a public official and disseminate it with the intention of benefiting or harming another entity. Authorities argued in the criminal complaint filed against Villarreal that she benefited from publishing the agent’s name by gaining Facebook followers.
Texas Monthly reported that the complaint reads, “Villarreal’s access to this information and releasing it on ‘Lagordiloca News Laredo Tx,’ before the official release by the Laredo Police Department Public Information Officer placed her ‘Facebook’ page ahead of the local official news media which in turn gained her popularity in Facebook.”
According to The Washington Post, Villarreal turned herself in voluntarily after a warrant was issued for her arrest, but believes she is innocent of wrongdoing and that the police are attempting to silence her reporting.
Villarreal and her legal representation were not immediately available for comment.
The Puerto Rico Department of Justice issued a search warrant for the Facebook accounts of three university publications on May 5, 2017, seeking information about student protesters who had rallied that April against austerity cuts at a meeting of the University of Puerto Rico's governing board.
Seven of those students will go on trial this November for interrupting the meeting. That interruption was part of a lengthy student-led protest movement against austerity cuts that effectively shut down the majority of the university’s eleven campuses for several months in the spring of 2017.
Superior Court Judge Rafael E. Jimenez-Rivera signed off on the search warrant, which requested Facebook data covering the period between April 26-28, 2017, from three student publications: Pulso Estudiantil, UPR Dialogue, and Centro de Comunicación Estudiantil.
Facebook provided some 1,553 pages of information from Pulso Estudiantil's Facebook account to the Puerto Rico Department of Justice, including private messages, photos, videos, comments and the names of those who commented on the account’s posts. Facebook provided another 1,500 pages from the account of Centro de Comunicación Estudiantil, according to a statement from CCE spokesman Gabriel Casals published by Metro Puerto Rico. Casals went on to demand that the charges against the student protesters be dropped.
The terms of the search warrant prevented Facebook from notifying the impacted parties for 90 days. Neither Facebook nor the Department of Justice notified the student media outlets about the search warrant after that period expired, according to a report from Pulso Estudiantil. Facebook’s policies require such notification, NoticEl reported, citing an attorney from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and so this constitutes a lapse on the part of the social networking site.
Editors at Pulso Estudiantil only learned of the search warrant on Sept. 27, 2019, when a staffer for Denis Márquez Lebrón, a member of the Puerto Rico House of Representatives, contacted them via Facebook about the matter. Lawyers representing the seven students on trial had uncovered the documents in the course of the discovery process, Marisol Nazario, executive director of Pulso Estudiantil, told the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker.
"We consider this to be a violation of our freedom of the press and our privacy," Nazario said. “If this happened to us, this could happen to any news outlet in Puerto Rico.”
At the time the search warrant was issued, now-Governor Wanda Vázquez Garced was then Puerto Rico’s Secretary of Justice. When asked about the warrant at a press conference in October, Vázquez Garced said the warrant was issued properly as part of a criminal investigation, El Nuevo Dia reported.
A lawyer representing one of the seven students on trial for interrupting the university board meeting plans to challenge the legality of the search warrant, Metro Puerto Rico reported.
Márquez Lebrón introduced a House resolution on Sept. 19, 2019, calling for the body to investigate the matter and weigh in on whether the search warrant was constitutional.
"The House of Representatives must conduct an investigation in order to assess whether public security agencies are complying with the requirements established in the Constitution of Puerto Rico when accessing electronically stored information," the resolution says.
University of Puerto Rico students protest budget cuts in the spring of 2017. In May, the Department of Justice issued warrants for three student publications' Facebook accounts seeking information on student protesters.
",None,None,None,None,False,None,[],None,None,False,None,None,None,False,False,None,None,None,None,False,None,[],Facebook,other,Third-party,warrant,Federal,None,False,None,"Centro de Comunicación Estudiantil, Pulso Estudiantil, UPR Dialogue",student journalism,,,