Florida journalist indicted on allegations of conspiracy, computer fraud, wiretapping

Seven felony wiretapping counts were dropped against Florida-based independent journalist Tim Burke on Sept. 25, 2025, when a federal judge ruled that the government had not considered exceptions to the Wiretap Act in its indictment against him.

One charge of conspiracy and six of computer fraud remain, as the case against Burke approaches trial in the fall of 2025.

In May 2023, FBI agents raided Burke’s home and office and seized dozens of pieces of equipment in connection with a criminal probe into “alleged computer intrusions and intercepted communications at the Fox News Network,” according to reports at the time. More than two years after the raid, many of the items seized remain in FBI custody.

In February 2024, Burke was charged by the Department of Justice with 14 felony counts. The DOJ alleged that Burke and a co-conspirator used “compromised credentials” to gain access to websites with the live feeds of two media companies, and to download files and disseminate them.

Burke’s alleged co-conspirator, Marco Gaudino, provided “substantial assistance” to the government as it assembled the indictment against Burke, according to court records. Gaudino pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy and was sentenced in August 2025 to five years of probation.

In May 2025, Burke moved to dismiss the seven Wiretap Act charges against him, arguing that the government’s overbroad application of the statute in its suit against him violated the First Amendment.

An amicus brief filed by a group of civil liberties organizations, including Freedom of the Press Foundation, of which the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker is a project, noted exceptions to the statute when someone is “a party to the communication,” or when the “electronic communication is readily accessible to the general public.”

It would violate the First Amendment, the organizations argued, to require a defendant to prove that these exceptions were an appropriate defense to Wiretap Act charges against them.

U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle agreed, ruling that the government must prove that the exceptions didn’t apply to Burke, under “the presumption that Congress intends to legislate consistent with the First Amendment.”

“The question at this stage is not whether Congress may lawfully prohibit Burke’s particular alleged conduct—it may,” Mizelle wrote. “The question is whether the statute’s structure raises serious First Amendment concerns—it does. And the government’s statutory interpretation arguments fail to mitigate those concerns.”

Burke’s attorney Mark Rasch called the ruling “a victory for freedom of expression.”

In a statement celebrating the ruling, Jennifer Stisa Granick, surveillance and cybersecurity counsel with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, said, “It’s essential that courts stop prosecutors from twisting the law to silence news the government doesn’t like.”

Seth Stern, FPF’s director of advocacy, said, “We’re in an environment where government officials constantly experiment with new ways to criminalize journalism and speech that embarrasses them.

“We’re relieved that the judge stood up for the First Amendment,” he said.