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

Skip to comments.

Project Veritas balks at order
Journal Inquirer, Manchester, Conn. via Yahoo ^ | September 12, 2022 | Alex Wood

Posted on 09/12/2022 9:25:09 AM PDT by grundle

Sep. 12—Lawyers representing Project Veritas, which made an undercover video of a Greenwich assistant principal appearing to admit hiring discrimination against Catholics, conservatives, and people over 30, has responded angrily to a demand by the state attorney general's office that the organization preserve all material potentially relevant to its investigation.

PRESERVATION ISSUE

DEMAND: Connecticut attorney general's office wants Project Veritas to preserve all material potentially relevant to a civil rights investigation the office has opened in response to a covert video the group made of comments by an assistant principal in Greenwich.

RESPONSE: Project Veritas wants that demand "retracted immediately," citing Connecticut's shield law for the news media and saying the attorney general's letter contains a "thinly-veiled threat" against it.

In a Sept. 2 letter to Project Veritas President James O'Keefe, Deputy Associate Attorney General Gregory K. O'Connell said the attorney general's office had "opened a civil rights investigation into the possibility of discriminatory employment practices in the Greenwich Public Schools."

He instructed O'Keefe to "preserve all material potentially relevant to this investigation," adding that O'Keefe "must take immediate action to prevent the deletion or spoilation of any such material."

O'Connell went on to say that his office anticipates "issuing subpoenas for relevant material," adding that if the investigation "substantiates a pattern or practice of illegal conduct, we may initiate appropriate litigation to enforce federal and state law."

(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: connecticut; jamesokeefe; policestate; projectveritas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

1 posted on 09/12/2022 9:25:09 AM PDT by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: grundle
“ O'Connell went on to say that his office anticipates "issuing subpoenas for relevant material," adding that if the investigation "substantiates a pattern or practice of illegal conduct, we may initiate appropriate litigation to enforce federal and state law."

This shows that they are using this “investigation of discrimination” as a pretext to go fishing through PV’s records hoping to find something they can use against them. It’s actually a target letter.

2 posted on 09/12/2022 9:31:09 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Project Veritas put out a video on this. In the video they show his lawyers response letter. Basically the AG’s actions are illegal on both a state and federal level. Due to this being journalism.


3 posted on 09/12/2022 9:40:31 AM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle
Maybe I'm missing something, but this looks to be completely normal and reasonable. The AG's office is looking to investigate whether or not there was illegal discrimination by the school, as shown in the PV video. So, they're asking PV to preserve what they found because it might be evidence, or lead to the discovery of admissions evidence.

Why is that bad? Lawyers send out letters like that all the time to ensure that relevant evidence held by third parties isn't destroyed.

4 posted on 09/12/2022 9:45:57 AM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin

It is bad because it is nothing but a fishing expedition to go after PV by any means possible. PV along with Landmark Legal are probably the most effective weapons we have against the left.


5 posted on 09/12/2022 9:52:15 AM PDT by gibsonguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: grundle
HA!

That was NOT a "balk"!

That was a pitch aimed directly at the head.

6 posted on 09/12/2022 9:52:21 AM PDT by G Larry (Population Control means Killing Billions, not "limiting growth".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

JI was a great East of the River paper. It was a right of center paper when I left in 2005. Any CT FReepers know if it still a good paper?


7 posted on 09/12/2022 9:53:10 AM PDT by Deplorable American1776 (Defund the FBI, the American Stasi..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

You mean like the states are supposed to preserve their voting data?


8 posted on 09/12/2022 9:58:46 AM PDT by libertylover (Our biggest problem, BY FAR, is that almost all of big media is agenda-driven, not-truth driven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Sounds like they are trying hard to avoid recognizing PV as a news/journalist organization. Do not accept their rhetoric.


9 posted on 09/12/2022 10:08:03 AM PDT by bk1000 (Banned from Breitbart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin

No, its a thinly veiled threat.


10 posted on 09/12/2022 10:34:38 AM PDT by Husker24 (Pp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Husker24

It could be. But sending out preservation letters is very standard practice. Just sayin’.


11 posted on 09/12/2022 10:46:27 AM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Connecticut is a two party consent state. If the video was recorded in CT, it is most likely illegal. On the other hand, Greenwich is on the New York border so it’s very possible it was recorded in NY, which has no such law.


12 posted on 09/12/2022 10:50:28 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grundle

They didn’t “balk” they refused and referred the AG to the First Amendment.


13 posted on 09/12/2022 10:53:02 AM PDT by \/\/ayne (I regret that I have but one subscription cancellation notice to give to my local newspaper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

Also, though admittedly it’s been a while (law school?) since I’ve dealt with it since I’m in a one party state anyway, IIRC you can’t complain about being recorded if you’re in a public place where you have no expectation of privacy in the first place.


14 posted on 09/12/2022 11:01:14 AM PDT by CraigEsq
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: grundle

wipe it with a cloth- heck- hillary got away with it


15 posted on 09/12/2022 11:06:10 AM PDT by Bob434 (question)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin

Because statutes protect journalists from being subpoenaed to produce records (and by extension protect journalists from being told to preserve records so they can be subpoenaed).


16 posted on 09/12/2022 11:24:21 AM PDT by TheConservator (Beware the tyranny of the woke mob. There has never been a greater threat to liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Revel
Project Veritas put out a video on this. In the video they show his lawyers response letter. Basically the AG’s actions are illegal on both a state and federal level. Due to this being journalism.

Veritas means Truth. Since when is Truth considered journalism? /s

17 posted on 09/12/2022 11:40:56 AM PDT by gitmo (If your theology doesn't become your biography, what good is it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TheConservator

Right - I saw that in the article, so that may be the case in Connecticut. It isn’t everywhere, and I wonder if there are exceptions. In any case, it sounds like they’re concerned that this school may have broken the law.


18 posted on 09/12/2022 12:23:51 PM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: grundle
The OP article was pretty lame.

Here's the Project Veritas version

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RYgx-nqgcRs

19 posted on 09/12/2022 12:37:55 PM PDT by Hootowl99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin
"Maybe I'm missing something, but this looks to be completely normal and reasonable. The AG's office is looking to investigate whether or not there was illegal discrimination by the school, as shown in the PV video. So, they're asking PV to preserve what they found because it might be evidence, or lead to the discovery of admissions evidence."

That's how I see it, but some people seem to view this as an effort to turn the tables and go after Project Veritas on some pretext.
20 posted on 09/12/2022 12:41:23 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 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