Jury Finds Web Site a Threat 
             Rejects Free-Speech Argument,
             Awards $100 Million in Damages 
                                        
The home page from a controversial Web site called "The Nuremberg Files" has an 
illustration of blood dripping from aborted fetuses. It lists the names of abortion 
providers, their home addresses and license plate numbers. 

By Lauren Dodge
The Associated Press
P O R T L A N D, Ore., Feb. 2 � A federal jury ruled today that a Web site and 
�wanted� posters listing abortion doctors� names and addresses amounted to death 
threats, ordering the site�s authors to pay damages of more than $100 million. 
Striking a blow to militant online tactics in the fight against abortion, the verdict 
could redefine what is considered constitutionally protected political speech. The 
anti-abortion materials contained no explicit threats of violence, only veiled 
messages, such as crossing through the names of abortion providers who were killed. 
�The jury saw the posters for what they are � a hit list for terrorists,� said Gloria 
Feldt, the president of Planned Parenthood, the main plaintiff in the case. �Whether 
these threats are posted on trees or on the Internet, their intent and impact is the 
same.� 
             �A Moral and Constitutional Outrage� 
Defendants had said that they would not pay any damages, no matter what the verdict.  
One of the defendants, Catherine Ramey, sobbed as the verdict came in, after more than 
four days of deliberations.  �This is a moral and constitutional outrage,� Ramey said 
afterward. She criticized the key ruling by the judge, who defined threat as something 
that could be taken as a threat by a �reasonable person,� rather than as something 
that made lawless action �imminent.�  �There was no threat and they knew it,� Ramey 
said. She had testified that she would not so much as offer a tissue to an abortion 
provider if he or she was shot.  At issue was the �The Nuremberg Files�  Web site, 
which lists hundreds of �baby butchers� and invites readers to send in such
personal details as their home addresses, license plate numbers and even the names of 
their children. The similar Wild West-style posters offered a $5,000 reward for 
information about the �Deadly Dozen� doctors branded �Guilty of Crimes Against 
Humanity.� 
               Doctors Describe a Life of Fear 
Three times, doctors whose names appeared on the list were killed, most recently last 
October when Dr. Barnett Slepian was gunned down by sniper fire in his home outside 
Buffalo, N.Y. His name on the Web site was
promptly crossed through.  Throughout the three-week trial, held under tight security, 
abortion doctors on the list testified that they lived in constant fear, used 
disguises, bodyguards and bulletproof vests, and instructed their children to crouch 
in the bathroom if they heard gunfire.  �This is terrorism,� plaintiffs� attorney 
Maria Vullo said in closing arguments, pointing
to a timeline of the four doctors and two clinic workers killed since 1993. �The 
message is, �Stop performing abortion or wear a bulletproof vest.��  Attorneys for 
more than a dozen  defendants, including the antiabortion umbrella group American 
Coalition of Life
Advocates, contended their clients were peaceful protesters engaged in a vigorous 
political debate.  But on the stand, defendant Andrew Burnett, publisher of Life 
Advocate Magazine, conceded that doctors may have reason to fear the Web site because 
of the extent of
anti-abortion violence.  �If I was an abortionist,� he said, �I would be afraid.� 
               Tactics Will Not Change 
Defendants had indicated that no matter what the verdict, their tactics would not 
change.  They also said any monetary award would have nothing more than a symbolic 
impact because they have transferred their assets to make themselves �judgment-proof.� 
 The plaintiffs sued under federal racketeering statutes and the 1994 Freedom of 
Access to Clinic Entrances Act, which makes it illegal to incite violence against 
abortion doctors and their patients.  While the law has been used often against people 
who have firebombed clinics or attacked doctors, this case, filed in 1995, was 
believed to be the first not to result from a violent confrontation or a direct, 
person-to-person threat. 
Joe E. Dees
Poet, Pagan, Philosopher


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Access your e-mail anywhere, at any time.
Get your FREE BellSouth Web Mail account today!
http://webmail.bellsouth.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to