CIvilharassment.com solicits reports of Internet takedown orders similar to that restraining Anthony Morelli. Submission may be made via the site. We publish what we can without exposing the reporters to unwanted judicial retaliation. We keep information on file and share the information with parties across the nation who are attempting to secure free speech via the Internet, and more precisely, the World Wide Web of websites.
Illegal orders restraining Internet speech have become increasingly common. They are particularly pervasive in family law and civil harassment cases because judges in such cases have been granted extraordinary "summary judgement" powers unregulated by normal Constitutional due process. Usually no jury is involved, and rules of evidence and procedure leave much more power to the judge to control the outcome. As will all court procedures, nothing much happens to a judge who violates the constitution even if they do so willingly.
Since the "Internet" is a powerful tool beholden to no judge friendly "good ole boy" network of colleagues to expose judicial misconduct, judges across the nation have targeted the Internet just as they did traditional media in the early part of the 20th Century.
On 8/2/2011, the NBC Today Show broadcast a 7 minute and 30 second segment about the Morelli case. Both husband and wife voluntarily appeared for interviews. Each party was identified by name. Apparently, a family picture of an outing to the ocean which seems to include one of the couple's sons was also broadcast as part of this show.
Is the Judge Gibbons now going to add "television network" to the list of media (networks of computers, TV, radio, newspapers, etc.) Morelli may not use to "speak"?
In RE the marriage of Daryl J. Schmidt and Jill M. Ferguson, parallels the case of Anthony Morelli in that Jill Ferguson was similarly restrained by a Commissioner. Ferguson spent time in jail as part of her ordeal. She too published information about her ex-spouse on the Internet which no court has proven to be defamatory.
The Contempt of Court complaint is still pending. http://www.civilharassment.com/cases/wisconsin-v-ferguson-divorc/ferguson-complaint.pdf
“Respondent May NOT Use Internet in Any Manner to Communicate About Petitioner Ever Again” so was ordered Jill Ferguson. Noted Professor Eugene Volokh provides commentary about how such language violates the constitution at http://volokh.com/2010/09/17/respondent-may-not-use-internet-in-any-manner-to-communicate-about-petitioner-ever-again/
Father Morrelli's appeal is just one of thousands by people working to secure free speech so that Morelli's sons and all of us may live in a society free from totalitarian rule and fiats proclaimed by a single contemptuous judge.