SLAPP?

Bill Peduto claims that the lawsuit Lamar Advertising filed against him and his fellow Councilmen Shields, Burgess, Kraus, and Dowd was a SLAPP. He seems to suggest the city law department opinion about their legal expenses has the sting of a SLAPP, too.

What's a SLAPP?

I didn't recall the term, but apparently SLAPPs have a long and contentious history.

SLAPP stands for "Strategic lawsuit against public participation".


Wikipedia defines it as:

"a form of litigation frequently filed by organizations or individuals to intimidate and silence critics or opponents by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense so that they abandon their criticism or opposition."

California passed a law to protect against SLAPPs. So have more than two dozen other states. That includes Pennsylvania, though our state's has been described as a "significantly weakened version passed into law in 2000." It was designed to deal only with environmental law cases, and reportedly was passed "after a coal baron sued an elderly constituent for filing a complaint with the state’s Department of Environmental Protection when her home suffered acid mine-water damage."

That's from this article in Philly area newspaper that quotes a critic complaining that a court ruling created "an unduly narrow interpretation that destroys any value or purpose of the statute."

It seems that SLAPPs are an international phenomenon. Here' s a YouTube video report by CUTV. Concordia University Television is Canada's oldest student-run television station. I'm linking to it here for some interesting background. As they say on the DVD extras, this is for entertainment purposes only, and does not necessarily reflect the views, etc.




Here are some PG articles in which the term "SLAPP" appears.

Developers sue Franklin Park, residents for losses
Suit cites neighbors' 'frivolous objections' to townhouse plan


The dash to SLAPP is chilling


Judge drops neighbors from townhouse lawsuit

Meanwhile, I ran into Lamar Advertising's attorney Sam Kamin as I was leaving the City County Building after Tuesday's council meeting. He told me he had just finished dictating the court filing to withdraw Lamar's lawsuit against the city council members, as agreed to in the arrangement signed before the zoning board.

A check of the county court's website shows that the lawsuit has now been "Discontinued without Prejudice".

What the significance there is (if any) of the lawsuit being discontinued "without prejudice" in this case, I do not know.

.

Read More...

Summary only...

Chessboards & Mushroom Clouds At City Hall

It's hard to choose which of the two pictures above is the best to foreshadow the ongoing escalation in exchanges between the Ravenstahl administration and City Council.

Is this story about something more than a simple snit over paying a legal bill? Four Council members are being told that what began with their challenging that controversial electronic billboard could end with their forced removal from office.

One gets the sense that there are powerful and volatile combinations in play beyond the view of the news of the day.

Check out this blog post about where this legal clash involving Lamar Advertising, City Council, and the Ravenstahl administration was heading. That showdown was asking for depositions and subpoenas of the Mayor, Chief of Staff Yarone Zober, and URA Executive Director Pat Ford on one side, and of five City Council members and their staffers on the other.



Meanwhile, Lamar Advertising's lawsuit against the four City Council members still has not been formally withdrawn...(as of this blog post early Tuesday morning). Doing so was part of the settlement negotiated between attorneys for Lamar, City Solicitor George Specter, and Councilman Patrick Dowd's privately hired attorneys.

When I asked Lamar Advertising's attorney Sam Kamin about this last week, he told me initially that the lawsuit was moot. When I asked him how long it could sit there -- dormant but not officially withdrawn -- before it expired, he answered in terms of years. He assured me there was "nothing nefarious " involved, then closed by saying that in response to my inquiry he intended to formally withdraw the lawsuit as Lamar Advertising had agreed to do in its signed settlement before the Zoning Board.

Note, by the way: the lawsuit by Lamar advertising against Shields, Peduto, Kraus, and Burgess says clearly that those four were (are?) each being sued as members of City Council. Only Patrick Dowd was also being sued as an individual. Among other things, the suit alleges that they violated the Sunshine Act. That's something that a public official can be accused of doing, but not a private citizen.

.

Read More...

Summary only...

If Wecht Stands Trial Again, Judge Schwab Intends to Preside

This past week, a federal appeals court put a second trial for former coroner Dr. Cyril Wecht on hold. The panel of judges will decide if a second trial should be forbidden on the basis of double jeopardy. That overshadowed another development: Judge Arthur Schwab's refusal of the latest defense call to remove himself from the case, should it go forward.

Here are some highlights from Judge Schwab's 33 page opinion.

"...The Court denies defendant’s Renewed Motion for Recusal because a reasonable observer, aware of all of the facts and circumstances of record, could not find an appearance of partiality or bias..."

"...There is nothing about this Court’s fair and impartial rulings and statements throughout these proceedings that present, to any reasonable observer who knows all of the facts and circumstances of record, any degree of favoritism or antagonism -- let alone the sort of “deep-seated” or “high degree” of favoritism or antagonism that might qualify as one of the rare exceptions to the general rule..."

"...It is crucial to the proper functioning of our justice system for judges to remain upright in face of political and media clamour that occasionally accompanies high profile cases, and resist the temptation to “capitulate,” so as not to encourage such extraneous pressure on judges in the future..."


"...Defendant’s Brief... attaches an affidavit executed by [dismissed juror] Stanley Albright... which defendant contends contradicts this Court’s statement in open court...that he had requested to be excused. This convoluted ground for recusal suggests, frankly, that this Court lied about Mr. Albright’s condition when it discharged him...for the purpose of securing an advantage for the government..."


"...some additional observations are appropriate in order to correct a few of defendant’s distortions of the record and dispel his untenable claims that this Court was less than accurate about the reasons it discharged Stanley Albright and that the Court was attempting to help the government obtain a conviction by Mr. Albright’s discharge."

"First, this Court has never spoken with Mr. Albright. All communications with the Court were through the Court’s bailiffs on April 2 and 3, 2008, and the Court’s statements in open court were accurately based on what Mr. Albright told one of the bailiffs the morning of April 3rd (as he later confirmed to the other bailiff)..."


"...Second, Mr. Albright’s April 17th affidavit is not materially different from the Court’s explanation in open court, or the letter he faxed to the Court later on April 3rd...."

"...Third, there is nothing on the record that indicates which way Mr. Albright might have been leaning before the Court discharged him, and he does not disclose his vote on any count ofthe indictment in his affidavit..."

"...The Court also shares Mr. Albright’s regret that he was unable to remain with the jury through its final day of service, when the Court declared a mistrial and discharged the jury on April 8, 2008. However, there is no doubt on the record before the Court, including Mr. Albright’s affidavit of April 17th, that he was unavailable for jury deliberations on April 2nd and 3rd, and that the Court exercised sound discretion in discharging him for good cause and directing the jury to continue..."

"...One knowing all of the facts of record could not possibly infer that this Court “wielded the club of contempt” when it directly issued a much needed (and probably overdue) reminder to counsel for both parties to conduct themselves professionally, as Officers of the Court, so as to protect the integrity of the jury pool from the possibility of contamination by the media maelstrom. Cases and controversies before a federal district or appellate court must not be adjudicated in the court of public opinion..."


"...the transcript of the proceedings -- will find some rulings that favor the government, and some that favor defendant. The record also shows that many significant rulings on motions and on disputes as to jury instructions favored the defendant, and that the unhurried, non-coercive jury deliberations were beneficial to him as well."

"...The record contains no hint of bias, prejudice or ill-will toward the defendant or his attorneys. Despite defendant’s continued threats and filings of recusal motions and his abuse of the writ of mandamus, this Court will, as it always has done, faithfully endeavor to follow its constitutional obligations and continue to provide defendant with a fair trial before an impartial jury of his peers..."

"...Defendant has every right to appeal any and all of the rulings and decisions of this Court in the event of an adverse jury verdict upon retrial, at the proper time... Defendant has no right, however, to disrupt ongoing criminal proceedings by engaging in repeated, frivolous attempts to judge-shop by removing the presiding District Judge based solely on defendant’s disagreement with some of the Court’s rulings..."

"...For all of the foregoing reasons, defendant’s Renewed Motion for Recusal is DENIED."

"SO ORDERED this 8th day of May, 2008.
s/ Arthur J. SchwabArthur J. Schwab
United States District Judge "

Read More...

Summary only...

Reverend Rossi Goes Hollywood

You'll find a link to my Channel 4 Action News report here.

It's about the DVD directed by and starring Reverend Richard Rossi, whose jury deadlocked and did not convict him of attempting to murder his wife in Butler County back in 1994. Rossi later entered a "no contest" plea to a count of aggravated assault in the case, and served a few months in jail.


You can see the trailer for his movie here...


...and his YouTube reel of acting highlights here.


Credit to Steve Levin of the PG for doing the story about Rossi in Sunday's paper; I had spotted the DVD on the shelf at BlockBuster, but not realized it was made by Rossi.

The line in the PG story that stuck in my mind was something also mentioned on the DVD box. The PG reported:

"...It was voted one of the top guerrilla films of all time ..."

It made me want to do some googling to learn more. With the exception of this news release, the only references you'll find on the internet to this organization are in blurbs praising Rossi's movie:

Auteur independent filmmaker Richard Rossi won the top spot on the International Guerrilla Film Association's list of 100 Greatest guerrilla films for his low budget movie "Aimee Semple McPherson," a biopic about a fabled female evangelist in the Roaring Twenties. The results were announced yesterday at the annual IGFA party in New York.

The top five runnerups in order were "Eraserhead," a 1978 David Lynch film, "Night of the Living Dead" (George Romero's horror classic shot in 1968 for $68,000.00), Kevin Smith's $28,000.00 first feature (1994)"Clerks," "400 Blows," a French New Wave film directed by Francois Truffaut in 1959, and "El Mariachi," a 1993 Robert Rodriguez film shot for $7000.00...

...Richard Rossi shot his critically acclaimed movie on a $300.00 consumer camcorder, used clamp-on construction lights purchased at Home Depot for $48.00, and made "Aimee Semple McPherson" under a special Screen Actor's Guild experimental contract for films with budgets under $75,000.00

I can't find the "International Guerrilla Film Association". I did find three groups with similar names.


• International Guerrilla Video Festival: its official never heard of Rossi or his movie.


• International Guerrilla Film Database: its official never heard of the Sister Aimee movie or writer/director Rossi, either.


• There is an IGFA: it's the International Game Fish Association.

I called the contact number on the news release about the IGFA Top 100. The recording answers for Richard Rossi's production company.

If anyone can provide me with contact information for the International Guerrilla Film Assocation, I'll check it out and mention it here.


In the comments section at Topix, A person named Gina Morton describes seeing this remarkable moment of live theater involving Rossi:

I saw Richard Rossi, the director, writer, and actor in this film portray Elmer Gantry on stage at the Stella Adler Theatre on Hollywood Boulevard a couple years back, and in Long Beach. An amazing performance. The executor of the Richard Brooks estate was in attendance and came up on stage and gave Richard Rossi the Oscar from the 1960 "Elmer Gantry" film and said Richard Brooks would be proud. One of the best nights of theatre in LA ever.

.

Read More...

Summary only...

Pat Ford Ethics Review & Paid Leave Update

Here's a link to my Channel 4 Action News story updating URA Executive Director Pat Ford's situation.

The State Ethics Commission is not permitted to even acknowledge the existence of any review of his case. The agency's head of investigations did, however, outline for me the time frames set for all probes under Pennsylvania's ethics law.

The dollar figures cited in my report were reached by doing the simple math. Divide Ford's $115,000 salary by twelve to establish a monthly value. Next, multiply that value by the number of months that can be involved at each step of any preliminary inquiry or full ethics investigation.

The mayor's office did not respond to my request for comment from Mayor Ravenstahl and Chief of Staff Yarone Zober, who serves as chairman of the Urban Redevelopment Authority.

.

Read More...

Summary only...

Prosecutors Blast Wecht's "Relentlessly Dishonest Onslaught"

U.S. Attorney Buchanan & Doctor Wecht

Here are some highlights from the government's latest brief opposing a Dr. Cyril Wecht's motion for dismissal of the indictment against him.  This brief responds to the the defense claims of misconduct by the prosecution.  In the conclusion, the government again hints that it may seek a jury from outside the Pittsburgh area for the second trial.

It begins with this:

There is a risk for those who have been subjected to the full extent of Wecht's ongoing campaign of obfuscation, misdirection, half-truth, misstatement and outright falsehood -- a risk of becoming numb to the repeated false assertions or, worse yet, ceasing to be vigilant in the face of the relentlessly dishonest onslaught. However, the government will labor, yet again, to correct the record that Wecht's truthless motion would otherwise distort beyond recognition.

...contains these comments:

...Wecht's accusations are not only false, but knowingly so...

...Yet sensational accusations like these make good copy, regardless of their truth....

....On what basis do Wecht's lawyers, as officers of the Court, level this serious accusation of prosecutorial misconduct? No basis whatsoever. Wecht and his lawyers have made it out of whole cloth. It is a fabrication, nothing more.

....Wecht's accusation...is based entirely upon lies.

....I. Wecht's Entire Motion is Based Upon Falsehoods....

...The argument is based upon several outright fallacies....

...II. Wecht's Eight Other False Accusations of Prosecutorial Misconduct....

...The lack of truth in these accusations is apparent to anyone familiar with these proceedings. One is left to wonder, yet again, for whose benefit is Wecht writing?...

...and ends with this:

Conclusion

Perhaps nothing can preserve the public's right to a fair trial in this division of the Western District of Pennsylvania, in light of Wecht's relentless campaign of publicity and slander by false court filings. Yet this latest motion hits new lows -- including repulsive allegations of anti-Semitism, utterly false allegations of prosecutorial misconduct, and other baseless ad hominem attacks -- and should be denied.

Mary Beth Buchanan

United States Attorney

by: s/Stephen S. Stallings

Assistant U.S. Attorney

.

Read More...

Summary only...

Q&A Raw Video: Wecht Jurors Speak Out

The Pittsburgh Channel now has the raw video of the news conference by five jurors from the Wecht trial. Click here to watch.

Here are some quotes from my notes.


Juror Kimberly:

• "I felt strongly that the prosecution did not present a strong enough case that there was a plan or a scheme or intent to defraud."

• "I felt completely devalued, that the time and energy and everything I had put in the trial just flew out the window before we were even dismissed from the room." (On the quick decision by prosecutors to put Wecht on trial a second time.)

• "Now I feel that there definitely could be some political motivations behind what's happening with Doctor Wecht."

Juror Dawn:

• "We all sorted through tons and tons of the evidence, and we just not find any intent to defraud."

• "We truly did try, we went though count by count by count, just went through that barrage of paper, and it just was not there."

• "I feel it's politically motivated. There was a day in testimony where (defense attorney) Mr. McDevitt did not get a word in edgewise, objections just kept coming. And it really made me sit back and think, 'what is it that they're not allowing to come out to us?'"

• "The defense was not able to get a lot of information out to us, a lot of it was stopped, and I just feel that he somewhat sided with the government." (Referring to Judge Schwab.)

• "Just in the end, it was not enough to prove guilt."

Juror Linda:

• "I don't know if politically motivated or not, but it seemed to me that the motivations were certainly less than pure. There was something behind it other than seeking justice." (On the motive of the prosecution.)

• " I felt uncomfortable that the call was made by the FBI, as opposed to somebody directly from the prosecution. I just felt that -- by it's nature -- was intimidating." (On the prosecution's use of FBI agents to contact jurors at home to set up post-trial questioning.)

• "I believe that services were provided in good faith and the county was served in good faith." (On Wecht's work as coroner.)

• "I would do anything that it took if I could have an effect on there not being a future trial. I just feel that it would be punitive -- that there's not a chance that another jury would find differently than we did."

Juror Bruce:

• "With all the witnesses that came forth that had immunity, you would have have thought there'd be somebody that would have dropped a bomb or had the smoking gun."

• "There was no intent for him to defraud the citizens of Allegheny County or his private clients."

Jury Foreman Bob:

• "I'm thinking to myself, geez, you had three years to find somebody and this is the best you could do? I mean, they weren't even upset." (Referring to testimony by the alleged victims among Wecht's private clients.)

• "I definitely feel it's a waste of taxpayer's money. I don't understand how they can find a juror that would convict him, to have twelve people to be unanimous."

• "Definitely politics, now that it's all said and done. Not so much that I thought that during the trial, but especially after you think about how quickly (Assistant U.S. Attorney) Mr. Stallings got up and said we're retrying him, how quickly they had a date set."

• "I was shocked. I was surprised that he would make that decision already without even knowing what the counts (of guilty and not guilty votes by jurors) were."

• "I kind of felt it was a slap in the face. that it was almost like you know, we don't even care what time you put into it or what you thought. It wasn't what we want to hear, so we're doing it again."

• "Drop it and walk away." (His advice to prosecutors.)

.

Read More...

Summary only...