Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

B.G. teen pleads guilty in racist e-mail case
The Columbian ^ | 3/30/2009 | ISOLDE RAFTERY

Posted on 03/31/2009 11:34:07 AM PDT by ThisLittleLightofMine

For weeks, the case involving racist e-mails sent to a Battle Ground city councilman was put on hold, pending word from the U.S. Attorney's Office in Seattle.

The e-mails were from Battle Ground teenager Christopher Reinhold, who used the name "battleground anonymous." They were sent to Councilman Paul Zandamela, an African-born man from Mozambique who had been sworn into his position the night before the first e-mail was sent, on Jan. 8, 2008.

Lawyers at the U.S. Attorney's Office became interested in the case and on Friday wrote to Reinhold's defense attorney, Jon McMullen, that they would let the case rest if Reinhold changed his plea.

Reinhold had pleaded not guilty to a cyberstalking charge, which is a gross misdemeanor. On Monday morning, Reinhold changed his plea to guilty in District Court Judge Darvin Zimmerman's courtroom.

"Basically, they said, 'If you fight it down here, win lose or draw, we'll charge in federal court,' " McMullen said.

At the U.S. Attorney's Office in Seattle, spokeswoman Emilie Langley said she couldn't discuss the case, per Justice Department rules. The Justice Department doesn't allow its representatives to discuss cases until paperwork has been filed, and in this case, Langley said, communication appears to have been between attorneys.

Son of deputy mayor

McMullen, who had argued this could be a matter of free speech, said he believes the U.S. Attorney's Office may have been interested for civil rights reasons.

"This is different from a guy stalking his girlfriend or someone sending pornography to someone else over the Internet," McMullen said.

Reinhold is 19 and the son of Battle Ground Deputy Mayor Alex Reinhold. He was barely audible Monday, as he stood before Judge Zimmerman.

Neither he nor his father wanted to comment after Monday's court appearance.

Reached by phone Monday, Paul Zandamela thanked Battle Ground residents who stopped him in the grocery store and sent him cards and e-mails of support last winter.

"I just wish the government of Battle Ground had been more supportive to me than they were," Zandamela said. "The citizens were terrific, and I wish the government had done the same thing. And that's sad."

Reinhold is scheduled to be sentenced on May 18. McMullen said he doesn't know how his client will be sentenced, as this is an unusual case and sentencing guidelines for misdemeanors tend to be more flexible than with felonies.


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: cyberstalking; freedomofspeech
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last
I think the kid was clearly a racist but I also believe they are violating his free speech rights. Any thoughts?
1 posted on 03/31/2009 11:34:08 AM PDT by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine
This is violation of the Constitution and the right to free speech. But then the left wing anti-Americans could care less about the Constitution.
2 posted on 03/31/2009 11:38:06 AM PDT by YOUGOTIT (I will always be a Soldier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YOUGOTIT

The Constitution doesn’t have provisions for promoting “social justice” - that’s the “fatal flaw” that 0bama and the leftists see in it.


3 posted on 03/31/2009 11:40:50 AM PDT by MrB (irreconcilable: One of two or more conflicting ideas or beliefs that cannot be brought into harmony.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine
I think the kid was clearly a racist but I also believe they are violating his free speech rights. Any thoughts?

"Basically, they said, 'If you fight it down here, win lose or draw, we'll charge in federal court."

So the US attorney told the kid, if you fight the charges in state court and win, you will be charged in federal court. Isn't this double jeopardy?

It smacks of a threat at the very least!!

4 posted on 03/31/2009 11:42:46 AM PDT by Islander7 (If you want to anger conservatives, lie to them. If you want to anger liberals, tell them the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

More hate speech BS. There was a time when elected officials just assumed some people would not like them and rolled with the punch. Now they have to have their day in court, ridiculas.


5 posted on 03/31/2009 11:51:17 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB
We have a racist couple in the next town that go around hanging screeds from mailboxes and tossing them into yards.

Some of the stuff is pretty bad, and a lot of people complain. The Police claim they can do nothing about it because it is a First Amendment Issue. (This being the state it is, the PD's go overboard being PC, so they are NOT saying this because they go to Klan Meetings on weekends).

The issue here, is that they SIGN THEIR NAMES to it.

I can see the argument of someone hiding behind an ISP or anonymizer doing this and then wanting protection for Free Speech being not exactly the same thing as "I am Joe Smith, I live in Anytown, and I think that all whatevers should be sent back to wherever they came from".

The point is everyone, including the Police, know who they are, they are open about it, and in their own way, honest. Sure, they are nuts, kooks, @ssholes, whatever..but they are convinced they are in the right and being honest, loathsome as they may be.

They are not cyberstalking and being sneaky cowards terrorizing someone because they think they are anonymous and will not get caught.

6 posted on 03/31/2009 11:51:30 AM PDT by Gorzaloon (Roark, Architect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine
Photobucket
7 posted on 03/31/2009 11:52:45 AM PDT by Tzimisce (http://groups.myspace.com/nailthemessiah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gorzaloon

Wow, in a way, those Aholes deserve some respect... :)

Seriously, they’re risking their lives and limbs to express unpopular ideas. This is exactly what the first amendment is about.


8 posted on 03/31/2009 11:53:44 AM PDT by MrB (irreconcilable: One of two or more conflicting ideas or beliefs that cannot be brought into harmony.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Islander7

Double jeopardy Didn’t apply in the Rodney King case.


9 posted on 03/31/2009 11:54:14 AM PDT by preacher (A government which robs from Peter to pay Paul will always have the support of Paul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

I’m not sure if its a violation of his free speech.
He has a right to say those things, but he is a miserable little coward for not saying them openly, for all to see.

For example, he could have written those comments on a sign and protested at the City Hall. Or written a letter to the editor and signed his name.


10 posted on 03/31/2009 11:56:24 AM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gorzaloon

We have a racist couple in the next town that go around hanging screeds from mailboxes and tossing them into yards.

The mailbox is private property and so are the yards. They could be charged with vandalism.

Other than that, they have a 1A right to go around town with their ‘screeds’ on placards or proclaiming it from public streets and sidewalks.

I think they ARE being cowards if they are doing this as you say.


11 posted on 03/31/2009 11:59:22 AM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

“The mailbox is private property and so are the yards.”

Yard, yes. Mailbox - it appears that the U.S. Government owns it. Yes, I know you bought it but it’s their’s now.

After all, it’s not a federal crime for someone to pilfer your property but they’d better not mess with the U.S. Mail.

http://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/gg97085.pdf


12 posted on 03/31/2009 12:13:45 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (Selah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

I cannot label them racist because I have not (and will probably never have) the opportunity to read them. The Constitutionality of the prosecution can be argued, but I feel it was faulty. What I can say with absolute assurance is that this places us on a slippery slope, which could land us in the Inquisition-style European legal cesspool where the mere expression of dissent to a minority position with words deemed angry or inappropriate can send one to the docks.


13 posted on 03/31/2009 12:14:59 PM PDT by Dionysius (Jingoism is no vice in these troubled times.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

How can you so quickly call him a racist without ever having read the e-mails?


14 posted on 03/31/2009 12:18:31 PM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, then writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YOUGOTIT

They didn’t prosecute him but they did extort him.

He could fight this in civil court.


15 posted on 03/31/2009 12:19:44 PM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, then writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Thanks for the info. I thought the federal government owned in the INSIDE of your mailbox, but not the outside.


16 posted on 03/31/2009 12:19:50 PM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

Here’s an interesting little article:

http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=5394


17 posted on 03/31/2009 12:22:36 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (Selah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

Unless he was making threats/false reports/etc., or sending so much as to disrupt operations, the state has no business charging him with a crime.


18 posted on 03/31/2009 12:23:50 PM PDT by Sloth (The tree of liberty desperately needs watering.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

According to this source there was only one e-mail:

“As you know, there is a nigger on our city council named Paul Zandamela. Our city government must be corrupt to have this porch monkey as an elected official. According to our year 2000 census, coons only make up .49% of our population, and I know I would never vote for one of those spooks. I don’t see how a person who is different from 99.51% of our population can properly make decisions for us.

Sincerely,

Nigger Hater”

http://www.zimbio.com/member/Onelove/articles/1282246/Christopher+Reinhold+Son+Deputy+Mayor+Battle


19 posted on 03/31/2009 12:39:31 PM PDT by JoeDetweiler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

Some commentary from The Volokh Conspiracy a year ago:

“Traditional telephone harassment laws — for instance, ones that ban calls (sometimes limited to anonymous calls and sometimes not) that are intended “to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the called number” — are generally thought to be constitutional.............”

http://volokh.com/posts/1209665198.shtml


20 posted on 03/31/2009 12:45:42 PM PDT by JoeDetweiler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson