L.  Washington Resident Ordered

To Remove Names From Web Site

 

      A 70-year-old Washington State man spent more than 100 days in jail after refusing to comply with a court order to remove personal information from his Web site.  Self-proclaimed journalist Paul Trummel was jailed indefinitely on Feb. 27, 2002 for violating an order of the King County Superior Court by continuing to post materials on his Web site that a trial judge ruled harassing in nature.  Trummel v. Mitchell (unpublished).

      Mr. Trummel posted information on his personal Web site regarding perceived abuses by officials at his former housing complex.  Both the information itself, which included the names, addresses, and other personal information about the building owners, and the aggressive manner of interviewing these persons and other residents of the building, were deemed harassing.  A charge was brought against Mr. Trummel under Section 010 of Washington’s anti-harassment statute, which states in part:

      “The legislature finds that serious, personal harassment through repeated invasions of a person’s privacy by acts and words showing a pattern of harassment designed to coerce, intimidate, or humiliate is increasing.  The legislature finds further that prevention of such harassment is an important government objective.”  Wash. Rev. Code Sec. 10.14.010 (2002).  Section 020 of the statute states: “Unlawful harassment means a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person which seriously alarms, annoys, or harasses such person and serves no legitimate or lawful purpose.”  Wash. Rev. Code Sec. 10.14.020 (2002).

 

Journalistic Privilege Denied

      Mr. Trummel countered these charges in court by stating that his activities were privileged against such prosecution because he had a press card and was conducting an investigation of his fellow residents, as well as the staff and board of directors of the Council House apartment building.  The court held that, though freelance journalists are protected by the First Amendment, Mr. Trummel’s claim to be a bona fide member of the press was bogus, as he had never entered his supposed press credentials into evidence.

      However, even if Mr. Trummel were a member of the press, the court surmised, his activities would still not be protected by the First Amendment.  The court issued an order preventing Mr. Trummel from entering the Council House or coming within 500 feet thereof.  He was also prohibited from contacting any person on the Council House staff or board of directors by mail, electronically, by telephone, in writing, or through any third party.  The court claimed that Mr. Trummel was not prohibited from writing or publishing in any way.

      Mr. Trummel continued his suspect journalism while lurking at the edge of the 500-foot restraining area.  He then began to post the names, addresses, unlisted phone numbers, and social security numbers of the residence’s staff on his Web site, again claiming he was protected by his press credentials.

      The court, noting the protections afforded to the press by the U.S. Constitution, nevertheless found the Washington State Constitution’s protection of privacy rights to trump free speech.  Article I, Section 7 of the Washington Constitution states: “No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs or his home invaded without authority of law.”  The court, in requiring Mr. Trummel to remove this private information from his Web site, noted that it amounted to less than 100 of the 15,000 words on his Web site.  It also noted that the order at issue would be the same if Mr. Trummel were not using the Internet, but were handing out the information in leaflets on the street corner. 

      Upon receiving continuing complaints that Mr. Trummel was publishing the private information at issue, the court ordered him jailed on Feb. 27, 2002.  The court stated that Mr. Trummel was not being jailed for something he had done but “for something that he hasn’t yet done.  He has not removed the private information from his publications resulting in continued harassment of his victims and invasions of their right to be let alone.”

      On June 17, 2002, Mr. Trummel was conditionally released from jail until 1:30 p.m. on June 21, 2002 to remove the information from his Web site and to show the court why he should not continue to be held in contempt.  When the court reconvened on June 21, Mr. Trummel was allowed to go free, with the contempt findings vacated in their entirety.  The court found that Mr. Trummel had removed all of the offending materials from his Web site (even though the site had been mirrored at other locations by other persons), and that he agreed to remain in full compliance with the restraining orders in place prohibiting him from venturing near or into the Council House.  Mr. Trummel’s Web site, found at www.contracabal.org, now contains an “apologia” for the incident and a statement that he remains committed to fighting for First Amendment rights. 

      Mr. Trummel appealed the decision.  The Washington Court of Appeals refused to hear his appeal because the $250 filing fee was not paid on time.  The Washington Supreme Court remanded the case to the appeals court, stating that the court should have been more lenient with an indigent appellant, and ordered that court to hear the appeal. 

 

--Kevin Goldberg and Richard M. Schmidt, Jr.