This article has been reformatted from its original print version.
Prosecutors trying a University of Chicago professor’s son, who allegedly cyber-bullied multiple academics who disagreed with his father, released documents to a New York court last month that could implicate the professor in the crime.
Raphael Golb, 49, faces 51 criminal charges of identity theft, criminal impersonation, harassment, and unauthorized use of computers. He is the son of Oriental Institute Professor Norman Golb.
Raphael allegedly targeted and harassed intellectuals who disputed his father’s theory that the Dead Sea Scrolls originate in Jerusalem, rather than in Qumran, where the Scrolls were found. He allegedly harassed scholars by disseminating false accusations about them in public blogs and through e-mails to their friends and colleagues. The prosecution wrote that this allegation is supported by e-mails to other members of the family, including Dr. Golb, in a January 19 pre-trial motion.
The court documents allege Raphael sent e-mails to his brother and mother from alias accounts, including one dated July 24, 2008, that says, “By the way, if Dad has some comment on the latest Charles Gadda [an alleged alias of Raphael’s] exchange, he can send it through your e-mail, that way there would be no trace of it in his account.”
Neither Dr. Golb, his wife, nor his son Joel has been charged with a crime.
Dr. Golb is not quoted in any of the released e-mails. “There is e-mail correspondence between Raphael Golb’s alias accounts and Dr. Golb; however, it never overtly acknowledges a partnership,” District Attorney John Bandler wrote in the motion. “However, Raphael Golb’s alias accounts have forwarded to Dr. Norman Golb e-mail exchanges that the alias account (or another alias account) had with third parties.”
Dr. Golb wrote in a statement Friday that the evidence does not prove his involvement, and, in a brief interview Friday, Dr. Golb suggested Cargill had taken issue with a sour turn in a scholarly debate, leading to the court case. “As the consequence of a long-standing academic dispute, a campaign of personal attacks is now being waged against me and my family. Claimed ‘evidence’ is being grossly distorted for unworthy purposes and removed from context,” Dr. Golb wrote in the statement.
“It is perfectly normal for any academic family to express indignation in the case of its members being silenced, excluded, and misrepresented or, to all appearances, plagiarized. In the present case, fair-minded people with knowledge of the circumstances will quite readily come to understand who the victims and the victimizers are.”
Some, including alleged victim Dr. Robert Cargill, believe that Dr. Golb and his family were engaged in a conspiracy. Cargill, who called renewed an order of protection against Raphael on January 27, wrote in a blog post the next day, “The smear campaign was a Golb family affair!” He said the alleged crimes are examples of academic rivalry gone too far.
“A little professional jealousy can be a powerful motivator for scholars, encouraging them to focus on their work and produce new and better scholarship. However, when this jealousy, greed, or malice reaches a point where an individual is furtively, yet tenaciously and ubiquitously attempting to smear another scholar to the extent that Raphael Golb and perhaps members of his family are alleged to have done, it runs the danger of crossing into civilly actionable and even criminally actionable activity,” Cargill said in an e-mail interview.
Defense lawyers Ronald Kuby, Lea Spiess, and David Breitbart wrote in a January 26 memo that the e-mails are protected speech under the First Amendment. “The prosecution seems unable or unwilling to realize that the First Amendment protects the right of persons to criticize, attack, and campaign against the character, writings, and purported scholarship of others, even in strong, bitter language.”
“By the way, if Dad has some comment on the latest Charles Gadda … exchange, he can send it through your e-mail, that way there would be no trace of it in his account.”
As anyone can see, these words lead to the terrible implication that Raphael Golb, apparently on his own volition used the pseudonym “Charles Gadda” to criticize people who were attacking his father on the internet; that Raphael was aware these people were threatening legal action to try and get his articles taken down; and that he was concerned that they might want to get his father involved. It’s interesting to see this being used as evidence of a sinister plot among the Golb family, and of Dr. Golb’s “implication” in a “crime.” (One also wonders if there was not a touch of humor or irony in Raphael Golb’s email. This seems to be the case with his other emails too.)
The legal briefs in this case are available online (scrollmotions.wordpress.com)
There, we learn that Mr. Cargill, who is the individual feeding “information” to the New York prosecutors, contacted the University of Chicago last year with demands that they remove an article by Norman Golb from the University website, and that the University viewed these messages as “threats of nuisance litigation.” Interesting to see that this same person is now taking his campaign against Golb to the Chicago Maroon.
I found the blogs that Ilana Kowarski references in the above article are here:
robertcargill.com/2010/01/29/court-docs-detail-raphael-golbs-harassment-of-robert-cargill/
And here:
robertcargill.com/2010/01/28/bombshell-ny-das-response-to-raphael-golbs-motion-to-dismiss-charges-and-suppress-evidence/
btw, Alexander, why did you put the words “threats of nuisance litigation” above in quotes??
Austin, it’s perhaps not very surprising that you found (as you put it) these blogs in which Robert Cargill has been campaigning against Professor Golb and his family, because your personal statement on the Interfaith Youth Core site explains that you have “been under the mentorship of a young professor of religious studies, Robert Cargill.”
Your statement is here:
ifyc.org/programs/leadership/fellowsalliance/austin
It’s great to read about you and the great things you’ve been learning from your mentor. But as a member of the Church of Christ at Pepperdine, and as someone who has served in the capacity of Spiritual Life Advisor at that institution, don’t you think it might be a good thing to help heal the wounds and bring people together, rather than provide links to such hateful material?
In response to Alexander:
Judging from the “Charles Gadda” articles I remember seeing, Raphael Golb did not merely use pseudonyms to “criticize people who were attacking his father.” He used them to discuss Evangelical Christian involvement in science museum exhibits on the Dead Sea Scrolls. And he used them to criticize a pattern of secrecy and falsification in this field of studies.
Obviously it is illegal to use pseudonyms for this kind of outrageous whistle-blowing activity. Everyone should reject the efforts of Raphael Golb’s attorneys to defend such conduct on the basis of the “First Amendment.”
Lucile: I find it difficult to believe that it is illegal to “blow the whistle” on any kind of intellectual fraud. To me the use of pseudonyms sounds like an intriguing and humorous way of criticizing a “pattern of secrecy and falsification” in any field of studies. My own point was quite simple: the email cited at the end of the article above seems to indicate that Raphael Golb was wondering if his father had any comment on an online exchange in which lawsuits were being threatened, and in which, understandably, he did not wish to get his elderly father involved. I say this, because I recall seeing one such exchange myself, in which a deep and irrational rage against Norman Golb coming from various Christian scholars was already visible. Apparently Raphael Golb’s father did not have any comment, because there is none in the email “evidence.”
Austin: I put the words “threats of nuisance litigation” in quotes, because that’s what I recall reading, either in the legal briefs or in an email I received several months ago from the person who first told me about Mr. Cargill’s harassing demands to have an article by Norman Golb removed from the University website. If you have more accurate information on the precise language that was used to explain to your “mentor” that the principle of academic freedom allowed Norman Golb to post his article despite any harassing threats, perhaps you can share it with online Maroon readers.
ilana,
there’s been an update in the case.
golb’s motions to dismiss and suppress evidence were rejected by the judge.
the case is headed to trial.
details at: robertcargill.com/2010/02/25/denied-golb-case-heads-to-trial/
I applaud the New York County DA’s office pursuit of this prosecution.
Law Office of Harvey S. Mars LLC
There has been another update in the case. Raphael Golb has filed an appeal – here is the brief. raphaelgolbtrialtranscripts.wordpress. com/2011/03/17/raphael-golb-appeal-brief-filed/