RT @mhall119: Ironically, the people telling Americans that if they don't like their government they should leave, are the same people tell… 1 hour ago
RT @jonfavs: The crowd at Trump's rally chanting "send her back" after the President viciously and dishonestly attacked Ilhan Omar is one o… 3 hours ago
RT @DanRather: I hope we can finally stop asking if the president can sink any lower. 3 hours ago
RT @DanRather: This president's cruelty is matched by the cowardice of his enablers, who inflict just as much damage on this nation and its… 3 days ago
RT @jahimes: Unlike the Democratic Congresswomen @realDonaldTrump attacked today, I actually am a foreign-born Member of Congress. But I'm… 3 days ago
RT @MikePettigano: Here we see the British turn the Continentals' left flank. #RevolutionaryWarAirports https://t.co/NySH9vY8BO 1 week ago
RT @DeanObeidallah: There are just too many funny #RevolutionaryWarAirports images. Here are some such as the famed "Battle of LaGuardia" t… 1 week ago
RT @Ameligatha: The tide turned against the British when their gunpowder was re-routed through Newark and arrived at the wrong carousel at… 1 week ago
RT @DaddyRabbit13: Whoever edited the wiki of Washington crossing the Delaware - you are genius - and a very stable one at that! 😂 #Revolu… 1 week ago
Because of course he did. twitter.com/SpinDr/status/… 1 week ago
Follow @xkv8r
Raphael Golb re-sentenced to 2 months in prison, 3 years probation
Posted on July 14, 2014 by bobcargill (@xkv8r)
According to the AP:
A man convicted of using digital-age tools to impersonate and malign his father's academic rivals on the ancient subject of the Dead Sea Scrolls was sentenced Monday to two months in jail after the state's highest court tossed out some of his convictions — and with them, a state aggravated-harassment law.
The sentencing of Raphael Golb, who also got three years' probation, came after the Court of Appeals upheld convictions on other charges, including criminal impersonation and forgery. Golb had been sentenced earlier to six months' jail but free on bail during his appeal.
Golb was given a surrender date of July 22, but could ask the courts to hold off the jail term while appealing the case further.
So once again, the courts have decided that Dr. Golb is a convicted criminal. Dr. Golb was sentenced yet again to two months in prison and three years probation.
Raphael Golb, son of Ludwig Rosenberger Professor in Jewish History and Civilization at the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago Dr. Norman Golb, committed multiple crimes, was caught, lied about it to police, then claimed he was just joking, was convicted, was sentenced, appealed his conviction, was still found to be guilty on multiple counts, and now has been re-sentenced.
Dr. Golb is still guilty. Dr. Golb is still a criminal. Dr. Golb has been sentenced to do time.
(And of course, Dr. Golb will appeal yet again…)
For a history of this case, click here.
Filed under: archaeology, crime, dead sea scrolls, justice and legal, qumran | Tagged: aggravated harassment, criminal impersonation, forgery, identity theft, jail, lawrence schiffman, Ludwig Rosenberger Professor in Jewish History and Civilization, norman golb, ny court of appeals, NY Supreme Court, oriental institute, raphael golb, re-sentenced, stephen goranson, unauthorized use of a computer, university of chicago, verdict |	7 Comments »
NY Court of Appeals Upholds 19 Convictions Against Raphael Golb in Dead Sea Scrolls Case
Posted on May 13, 2014 by bobcargill (@xkv8r)
In the spirit of Paul Simon, Raphael Golb is still guilty after all these years. http://t.co/RjAXgWaFok
— Dr. Robert R Cargill (@xkv8r) May 13, 2014
Raphael Golb had multiple convictions upheld by the NY Court of Appeals. He had appealed the 29 counts on which he was initially convicted and which the NY Appellate Division had upheld. The NY Court of Appeals upheld 19 convictions.
The NY Court of Appeals today affirmed and upheld a total of 19 convictions of Raphael Golb, son of Dr. Norman Golb, Ludwig Rosenberger Professor in Jewish History and Civilization at the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, in a bizarre internet cybercrime case stemming from crimes committed beginning in 2007.
The NY Court of Appeals upheld 9 convictions of criminal impersonation and all 10 forgery convictions in the case of the People of NY v. Raphael Golb, in which the defendant created an army of pseudonymous online sock puppets to criticize, harass, and ultimately impersonate various scholars who disagreed with the academic findings of his father, Dr. Norman Golb, concerning the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The court vacated the top charge of identity theft (felony), 5 criminal impersonation convictions, all aggravated harassment convictions, as well as the conviction on the count of unauthorized use of a computer.
For the reasons that follow, we affirm the convictions for nine counts of criminal impersonation in the second degree and all of the convictions for forgery. We vacate the conviction for identity theft in the second degree; five of the convictions for criminal impersonation in the second degree; all of the convictions for aggravated harassment in the second degree, and the conviction for unauthorized use of a computer.
(For more, visit the NY Court of Appeals "Decisions" page.)
The vacating of the lone felony charge may mean reduced or no jail time for Dr. Golb, but that will be for the NY Supreme Court to decide, as the case has been remitted to them for resentencing:
Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Division should be modified by vacating the convictions for Counts 2, 3, 5, 23, 29, 40, 42, 44, 48, and 51, dismissing those counts of the indictment, and remitting to Supreme Court for resentencing, and, as so modified, affirmed. [emphasis mine]
Keep in mind, however, that while the now vacated felony count carried a sentence of six months and 5 years probation, the misdemeanor counts also carried three month prison sentences and three years probation of their own. So there is a chance that Dr. Golb's prison sentence may be reduced, but as 19 misdemeanor counts were affirmed, he could still serve time.
(For a list of convictions that were earlier upheld by the Appellate Division, see my earlier post from Jan. 29, 2013 here.)
I offered an initial response when Dr. Golb was initially sentenced. I'll add only the following:
For all those involved, this has been a grueling time. At the end of the day, Dr. Golb has been found guilty on 19 counts in a truly groundbreaking cybercrime case, which I'm sure many future cases will reference.
Raphael Golb is not only an internet troll, but he's also a criminal and now a convict. A jury of his peers, the NY Appellate Division, and now the NY Court of Appeals have all said so.
And while one might argue that sending pseudonymous letters to multiple supervisors containing speech that is intended to harass and "destroy the career prospects of a really nice guy" is not criminal harassment, it is difficult to argue that forgery and criminal impersonation are "protected" speech. That is where Dr. Golb's actions became criminal, and that is what the court has upheld.
Throughout this ordeal, we also learned that Raphael Golb's father, Dr. Norman Golb, not only knew about some of the activities of his son, but participated in informing them.
This is simply a sad case of academic pride run amok, and an example of the lengths to which some scholars will go to defame and injure those scholars who happen to disagree with their theories, including knowledgeably working with one's children, who have created an army of internet sockpuppets to commit crimes against others.
While I don't feel any better now that the NY Court of Appeals has determined that I wasn't harassed (at least not "criminally"), I am satisfied that Dr. Golb was found guilty on multiple counts, and that both the Appellate Division and the NY Court of Appeals have affirmed these convictions.
I should like to think that this will be the end of this mess, but I'm certain that this saga will continue. Dr. Golb has already vowed further appeals all the way to the US Supreme Court if allowed. For now, I take satisfaction in knowing that the wheels of justice, however slow, have once again arrived at a correct decision, and will continue to do so.
Filed under: archaeology, dead sea scrolls, internet, justice and legal, qumran, robert cargill, scholarship, ucla, University of Iowa | Tagged: aggravated harassment, criminal impersonation, forgery, identity theft, jail, lawrence schiffman, norman golb, ny court of appeals, NY Supreme Court, raphael golb, stephen goranson, unauthorized use of a computer, university of chicago, verdict |	6 Comments »
hurt puppy
Posted on February 16, 2013 by bobcargill (@xkv8r)
Filed under: dead sea scrolls, humor | Tagged: hurt puppy, John Leland, lawrence schiffman, norman golb, NY Times, raphael golb, ron kuby, sympathy |	3 Comments »
NY Court of Appeals Upholds Raphael Golb's Conviction on 29 of 30 Counts
Posted on January 29, 2013 by bobcargill (@xkv8r)
Dr. Raphael Golb, son of University of Chicago Oriental Institute historian Dr. Norman Golb, was found guilty on 30 felony and misdemeanor counts of identity theft, forgery, criminal impersonation, aggravated harassment, and the unauthorized use of a computer in the Criminal Division of the New York Supreme Court, September 30, 2010. On January 29, 2013, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department upheld the convictions on 29 of 30 counts for which Golb was convicted.
Word from the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department this evening is that a three-judge panel ruled unanimously to uphold the convictions on 29 of 30 felony and misdemeanor counts for which Raphael Golb was convicted in 2010.
In November of 2010, the Criminal Division of the New York Supreme Court found Dr. Raphael Golb, son of University of Chicago Oriental Institute historian Dr. Norman Golb, guilty of 30 felony and misdemeanor counts of identity theft, criminal impersonation, forgery, aggravated harassment, and the unauthorized use of a computer.
Prior to the trial, Golb turned down a plea bargain agreement in which he would have pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors, paid a fine, served 80 hours of community service, and been placed on three years probation.
Instead, Golb was convicted of 2 felony counts and 28 misdemeanors, and was sentenced to six months in prison and five years of probation, in addition to incurring the cost of a jury trial defense and an appeal.
The Court of Appeals issued this decision:
People v Golb
2013 NY Slip Op 00436
Decided on January 29, 2013
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
Mazzarelli, J.P., Renwick, Richter, Gische, Clark, JJ.
[*1]The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
Raphael Golb, Defendant-Appellant.
Ronald L. Kuby, New York, for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Vincent
Rivellese of counsel), for respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered November 18, 2010, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of identity theft in the second degree (2 counts), criminal impersonation in the second degree (14 counts), forgery in the third degree (10 counts), aggravated harassment in the second degree (3 counts), and unauthorized use of a computer, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of six months, unanimously modified, on the law and facts, to the extent of vacating the identity theft conviction under the first count of the indictment and dismissing that count, and otherwise affirmed. The matter is remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50(5).
One of the two felony counts was vacated and dismissed, but the Appellate Division unanimously denied Golb's appeal and reaffirmed the guilty verdict on the other 29 counts, including one felony.
The chart below (updated from the who-is-charles-gadda.com website) lists each charge, conviction, and appellate decision of the convicted felon Raphael Golb.
VERDICT (Sept. 30, 2010)
APPEAL DECISION (Jan. 29, 2013)
1. 7/1/2008 – 12/31/2008 PL 190.79(3). Identity theft in the second degree
(E-CLASS FELONY) (1 of 2 counts) Assumed identity of Lawrence Schiffman and committed/attempted to commit felony of Scheme to Defraud 1st Degree.
Vacated and Dismissed
(E-CLASS FELONY) (2 of 2 counts) Assumed identity of Lawrence Schiffman and committed/attempted to commit felony of Falsifying Business Records 1st Degree
3. 8/1/2008 – 12/31/2008 PL 240.30(l)(a) Aggravated harassment in the second degree
(1 of 3 counts) Aggravated harassment of Dr. Lawrence Schiffman
4. 8/3/2008 PL 190.25(1) Criminal impersonation in the second degree
(1 of 14 counts) Created larry.schiffman@gmail.com email account
(2 of 14 counts) Sent email from larry.schiffrnan@gmail.com to Dr. Schiffman's students
6. 8/4/2008 PL 170.05. Forgery in the third degree
(3 of 14 counts) Sent email from larry.schiffman@gmail.com to multiple NYU email addresses
(4 of 14 counts) Sent email from larry.schiffman@gmail.com to NYU Dean Stimpson
10. 8/5/2008 PL 170.05. Forgery in the third degree
11. 8/5/2008 PL 190.25(1) Criminal impersonation in the second degree
(5 of 14 counts) Sent email from larry.schiffman@gmail.com to NYU provost
(6 of 14 counts) Sent email from larry.schiffman@gmail.com to NYUNews.com, forwarding email from Provost office.
15. 11/22/2008 PL 190.25(1) Criminal impersonation in the second degree
(7 of 14 counts) Created email account seidel.jonathan@gmail.com
(8 of 14 counts) Sent email from seidel.jonathan@gmail.com to Royal Ontario Museum (ROM)
17. 11/22/2008 PL 170.05. Forgery in the third degree
(9 of 14 counts) Sent email from seidel.jonathan@gmail.com to Risa Kohn (ROM's curator for Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit)
(10 of 14 counts) Sent email from seidel.jonathan@gmail.com regarding Norman Golb
(8 of 10 counts) Sent email from seidel.jonathan@gmail.com regarding Norman Golb
22. 12/6/2008 PL 190.25(1) Criminal impersonation in the second degree
(11 of 14 counts) Sent email from seidel.jonathan@gmail.com regarding Stephen Goranson internet post
23. 12/6/2008 PL 170.05. Forgery in the third degree
(9 of 10 counts) Sent email from seidel.jonathan@gmail.com regarding Stephen Goranson internet post
24. 7/1/2008 – 12/31/2008 PL240.30(l)(a) Aggravated harassment in the second degree
(2 of 3 counts) Aggravated Harassment of Stephen Goranson
(12 of 14 counts) Created email account steve.goranson@gmail.com
26. 7/20/2008 PL 190.25(1) Criminal impersonation in the second degree
(13 of 14 counts) Created email account frank.cross2@gmail.com
(14 of 14 counts) Sent email from frank.cross2@gmail.com regarding Bart Ehrman and the Jewish Museum
28. 7/20/2008 PL 170.05. Forgery in the third degree
29. 6/1/2007 – 3/1/2009 PL 240.30(l)(a) Aggravated harassment in the second degree
(3 of 3 counts) Aggravated harassment of Robert Cargill
30. 7/1/2008 – 3/1/2009 PL 156.05 Unauthorized use of a Computer
(1 count) Unauthorized use of NYU computers to commit criminal offenses and otherwise in violation of NYU computer use policy
The rest of the appellate court's decision reads as follows:
Defendant's convictions arise out of his use of emails to impersonate actual persons. Nothing in this prosecution, or in the court's jury charge, violated defendant's First Amendment or other constitutional rights.
Defendant is the son of an expert on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Defendant set up email accounts in which he pretended to be other scholars who disagreed with defendant's father's opinion on the origin of the Scrolls. Among other things, defendant sent emails in which one of his father's rivals purportedly admitted to acts of plagiarism.
Defendant's principal defense was that these emails were only intended to be satiric hoaxes or pranks. However, as it has been observed in the context of trademark law, "[a] parody must convey two simultaneous – and contradictory – messages: that it is the original, but also that it is not the original and is instead a parody" (Cliffs Notes, Inc. v Bantam Doubleday Dell Pub. Group, Inc., 886 F2d 490, 494 [2d Cir 1989]). Here, the evidence clearly established that defendant never intended any kind of parody. Instead, he only intended to convey the first message to the readers of the emails, that is, that the purported authors were the actual authors. It was equally clear that defendant intended that the recipients' reliance on this deception would cause harm to the purported authors and benefits to defendant or his father.
The court's charge, which incorporated many of defendant's requests, fully protected his constitutional rights, and the court was not required to grant defendant's requests for additional instructions. The court carefully informed the jury that academic discussion, parody, satire and the use of pseudonyms were protected by the First Amendment.
The court also ensured that the jury understood the terms "fraud" and "defraud" by [*2]expanding their definition and advised the jury that "without the intent to deceive or defraud as to the source of the speech with the intent to reap a benefit from that deceit, there is no crime." The court was under no obligation to limit the definitions of "injure" or "defraud" – terms used in the forgery and criminal impersonation statutes – to tangible harms such as financial harm (see People v Kase, 76 AD2d 532, 537-538 [1st Dept 1980], affd 53 NY2d 989 [1981]). The court also properly employed the statutory definition of "benefit" as "any gain or advantage" to defendant or to another person (Penal Law § 10.00[17]).
Defendant argues that it is constitutionally impermissible to include an intent to influence a constitutionally-protected academic debate within the concept of fraud, injury or benefit, that allowing injury to reputation to satisfy the injury element would effectively revive the long-abandoned offense of criminal libel, and that, in any event, the alleged truth of the content of the emails should have been permitted as a defense. However, the evidence established that defendant intended harm that fell within the plain meaning of the term "injure," and that was not protected by the First Amendment, including damage to the careers and livelihoods of the scholars he impersonated. Defendant also intended to create specific benefits for his father's career. The fact that the underlying dispute between defendant and his father's rivals was a constitutionally-protected debate does not provide any First Amendment protection for acts that were otherwise unlawful.
Defendant was not prosecuted for the content of any of the emails, but only for giving the false impression that his victims were the actual authors of the emails. The First Amendment protects the right to criticize another person, but it does not permit anyone to give an intentionally false impression that the source of the message is that other person (see SMJ Group, Inc. v 417 Lafayette Restaurant LLC, 439 F Supp 2d 281 (SD NY 2006]).
We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining arguments concerning the court's charge. We similarly reject his claims that the statutes under which he was convicted were unconstitutionally vague or overbroad. None of these statutes was vague or overbroad on its face or as applied (see People v Shack, 86 NY2d 529, 538 [1995]; Broadrick v Oklahoma, 413 US 601, 611-616 [1973]). The People were required to prove that defendant had the specific fraudulent intent to deceive email recipients about his identity, and to obtain benefits or cause injuries as a result of the recipients' reliance on that deception. The statutes criminalized the act of impersonation and its unlawful intent, not the content of speech falsely imputed to the victims.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence, with the exception of the identity theft conviction under the first count. The theory of that count was that in the commission of identity theft in the second degree (Penal Law § 190.79[3]), defendant attempted to commit the felony of scheme to defraud in the first degree [*3](Penal Law § 190.65[1][b]). However, there was no evidence that defendant intended to defraud one or more persons of property in excess of $1,000 or that he attempted to do so (see id.). The People's assertions in this regard rest on speculation.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: JANUARY 29, 2013
(emphases mine)
If Dr. Golb stays true to form, he will almost certainly appeal this again, perhaps in some other jurisdiction. If nothing else, this case has demonstrated that certain people have tremendous difficulty putting down the shovel after digging themselves into a hole.
Still, I am pleased with the court's decision. While the wheels of justice turn slowly, and afford the guilty every possible avenue of defense, the process has demonstrated that it works in the end.
Filed under: archaeology, dead sea scrolls, justice and legal, Uncategorized, unprofessionalism | Tagged: aggravated harassment, and the unauthorized use of a computer, Appellate Division, bart ehrman, bobst library, Carol Berkman, charles gadda, convicted, Court of Appeals, criminal impersonation, Cyrus R. Vance, eric meyers, essenes, felony, first amendment, First Department, forgery, Frank Moore Cross, free speech, identity theft, jodi magness, jonathan seidel, lawrence schiffman, misdemeanor, norman golb, NY, nyu, oriental institute, People v Golb, prison, raphael golb, Rikers Island, risa levitt kohn, ronald kuby, stephen goranson, Supreme Court, university of chicago |	4 Comments »
quote of the day: "i'm not going to argue with you, he was cute."
"I'm not going to argue with you, he was cute." - Defense attorney David Breitbart on Dr. Robert R. Cargill.
In my review of the transcripts of the case of the People of New York vs. Raphael Golb, I came across the following statement, which caused me to laugh. The blush-inducing statement was made by Dr. Golb's defense attorney, David Breitbart, during his summation (closing arguments). In his summarization of my testimony, Mr. Breitbart opened with the following:
"Let me call your attention to a young man by the name of Robert Cargill. I'm not going to argue with you, he was cute. I'm not going to argue with you. We [the defense lawyers] don't look at anything else except you folks [the jury] and the witness, so we know he was considered cute, but that's not the point."
– Attorney for Raphael Golb, David Breitbart, during his closing arguments speaking to the jury about Dr. Robert R. Cargill (p. 1200, lines 8-12 of the court transcripts).
To my recollection, the jury was made up of a fairly equal number of men and women, most of whom were my age (and by that, I mean younger ;-). Apparently, Mr. Breitbart felt that I made a good impression on the jury, and so attempted to separate what I said from the one saying it. And, while I am fully aware that Dr. Golb's attorney, Mr. Breitbart, shortly thereafter proceeded in his attempt to impugn my credibility, and that his use of the word "cute" was actually pejorative (that is, cute only, which is never good for scholars and news anchors), I find it humorous (as well as quite consistent with my experiences in life) that even in a courtroom, with the exception of my wife, the kindest compliments about my appearance still come from men, not women. Go figure.
I'm not really certain how to respond, other than to say, "Thank you, Mr. Breitbart. It was the kindest (and I'm guessing the only kind) thing you said about me all day." ;-)
Filed under: dead sea scrolls, humor, i'm not making this up, qumran, robert cargill | Tagged: aggravated harassment, convicted, court, crime, criminal, criminal impersonation, david breitbart, forgery, guilty, identity theft, lawrence schiffman, liar, new york, norman golb, quote of the day, raphael golb, robert cargill, unauthorized use of a computer |	12 Comments »
'writing the dead sea scrolls' to re-air on national geographic channel december 11, 2010
Posted on November 29, 2010 by bobcargill (@xkv8r)
"Writing the Dead Sea Scrolls" is scheduled to re-air on NatGeo December 11, 2010. I've previously posted about this here.
If you're interested in the Dead Sea Scrolls, this is the show to watch.
Filed under: archaeology, bible, dead sea scrolls, Jerusalem, judaism, qumran, religion, robert cargill, tv | Tagged: adolfo roitman, american colony, antonia packard, ctvc, david keene, dead sea, dead sea scrolls, documentary, ein feshkhah, ein gedi, en gedi, gideon hadas, iaa, israel, israel antiquities authority, jan gunneweg, jean-baptiste humbert, Jerusalem, jodi magness, john fothergill, kidron valley, lawrence gardner, lawrence schiffman, masada, national geographic, nava mizrahi, orit shamir, palestine, paula nightingale, pnina shor, qumran, Ray Bruce, robert cargill, ronny reich, shimon gibson, silwan, stephen pfann, temple mount, wadi og, west bank, yuval peleg |	1 Comment »
trying to dig oneself out of a hole: raphael golb posts his appeal online
Raphael Golb is handcuffed and led from a Manhattan State Supreme courtroom in New York to prison after being sentenced to 6 months in jail and 5 years probation. Golb, son of University of Chicago Oriental Institute historian Dr. Norman Golb, was convicted on 30 felony and misdemeanor counts of identity theft, forgery, criminal impersonation, aggravated harassment, and the unauthorized use of a computer. Photo: Steven Hirsch
There's an old saying: "When you dig yourself into a hole, put down the shovel."
Apparently, no one ever taught this to Raphael Golb, whose latest attempt to garner sympathy from the paranoid, the friendless, and those involved in similar ordeals is now available online.
And good news: this latest volley from Dr. Golb seems to be having the desired effect. For instance, the "Overturn the Wrongful Conviction of Raphael Golb" group on Facebook has seen its membership rise significantly from 15 to 16 over the past month. Given that at least one of those "members" is a marketing bot, I'd say that it won't be long until the Raphael Golb Facebook group has as many fans as "The Great Kim Jong-Il" group (4377) or the "Sarah Palin for President 2012" group (92). Even ol' Jimmy Barfield's "Copper Scroll Project" has more supporters with 394.
Yes, Dr. Golb is back, and this time per the requirements of his sentencing and bail writing in his own name! Remarkably, Dr. Golb has essentially posted his conviction appeal online. I'm guessing the State of New York thanks him for the additional time to prepare its response. I mean seriously, didn't Dr. Golb learn anything from the trial? He hung his lawyers out to dry by posting every possible angle of every possible line of their questioning online several months before the trial actually began! Every witness knew exactly what Golb's attorneys were going to ask because the verbally-incontinent Golb had already posted it online months before. So thanks again for the advance notice.
(Unless, of course, Golb is using the same tactic he used during the trial, where he knew he would be found guilty 30 times, but decided to use the trial to attack his victims further, and decided to attempt to try his case in the blogosphere. The only problem is, I don't think Dr. Golb's most recent posting on the indymedia.org website qualifies as "protected speech." I'm assuming he didn't make any false claims in his indymedia post…)
For those of you who don't want to waste the time reading Dr. Golb's rant appeal, let me summarize it for you. I've listed who Raphael Golb thinks is responsible for his arrest and conviction in the table below:
People whose fault it is:
(in order of appearance)
People whose fault it is not:
Dead Sea scrolls "guild" or "monopoly"
"traditionalists"
"creators of museum exhibits"
a fake "consensus"
"defenders of the sectarian position"
"abuse of power and of financial influence" by scholars and academic institutions
"evangelical Christian educational institutions"
"orthodox Jews" who shared their basic perspective
"religiously oriented scholars"
Larry Schiffman
NYU officials
Assistant District Attorney John Bandler
Patrick McKenna, an investigating officer assigned to the New York Country D.A.'s identity theft unit
New York Criminal Court Judge Carol Berkman
"acute stress reaction"
agreeing "to be interrogated without an attorney"
"sly" interrogation techniques
District Attorney Robert Morgenthau
New York court system and "rules"
jury selection process
failure of judge "to explain to the jurors that my case was the first of its kind"
prevention of Golb's attorneys "from engaging in significant cross-examination of witnesses"
"Judge Berkman instructed the jury to find me guilty"
New York Jewish Museum
Salem witch trial
Senator Joseph McCarthy
Stephen Goranson
Duke University provost
UCLA faculty members
Risa Levitt Kohn
"coincidences" like despite claiming not to have known of "Johnathan Seidel," a rabbi in Oregon named Jonathan Seidel coincidentally graduated from Golb's alma mater, Oberlin College, and coincidentally was introduced to Norman Golb in England in 1986, and coincidentally discussed things over a coffee with him.
jurors' sheer fatigue
ill equipped jurors
academic "gatekeepers"
getting "carried away in the midst of a heated campaign of criticism which I [Golb] directed against a group of scholars
duplicitous museum exhibits
Raphael Golb
As you can see, just like his father and his theories, Golb argues that the reason neither is accepted by the academy is not because of problems with the theory or its proponent, but because of a massive conspiracy involving just about everyone else in the field. Raphael Golb's appeal argues that his conviction was not the result of his own illegal activities, but the result of a grand conspiracy, and everyone else is to blame.
Conspiracy theories. Blaming others. Not taking responsibility for actions. Victim mentality. It seems like it never ends…
Filed under: anonymity, blogging, crime, dead sea scrolls, internet, qumran, unprofessionalism | Tagged: anonymity, appeal, blame, crime, criminal, dead sea scrolls, guilty, identity theft, jail, lawrence schiffman, norman golb, not my fault, oriental institute, prison, qumran, raphael golb, reaction, robert cargill, unauthorized use of a computer, university of chicago |	9 Comments »