Immunity of persons at public hearing; attorney fees and costs. (SB577)

Virginians Need to Stop Getting SLAPPed Around ...

The Virginia General Assembly has two anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) bills before it this session that provide an opportunity for the oldest, continuous lawmaking body in the new world to do the founders of this nation proud by preserving and safeguarding the bedrock right of citizens to petition the government "for a redress of grievances," a right guaranteed by both The Bill of Rights and The Virginia Constitution, with legal roots stretching back to The Magna Carta.

The two bills -- HB1117 and SB577 -- arise from a legal nightmare that confronted four parents of Richmond Public School (RPS) students who were hit with a $3.5 million defamation lawsuit after they (and 50-plus other parents) collectively wrote and signed a letter that they sent to the Superintendent of RPS and to the members of the School Board. The letter detailed their concerns about the administrative actions of the principal at their children's middle school.

The $3.5 million defamation lawsuit is an example of a SLAPP lawsuit. The principal filed suit against the parents without the knowledge of either the Superintendent or School Board members, but only named four of the 50-plus parents who signed the letter -- Wendy and Todd Martin, Anthony and Yvette Conte. Wendy Martin testified before the Courts and Justice subcommittee this past Monday:

"This legislation is personal to me. In the summer of July 2013, my husband and I were among a group of 50 parents who wrote a letter to the Richmond Public Schools acting superintendent, outlining safety and educational problems at our daughter’s public middle school. RPS School Board member Kim Gray later referred to this letter as being “full of verifiable facts.” The school principal, in my opinion, was seeking revenge for our criticisms and an insurance payout among other things, sued us for defamation/malice AND $3.5 million dollars. A circuit court judge shut this lawsuit down. Yet the principal appealed it to the Virginia Supreme Court. They shut it down. So she filed a petition for rehearing. The Virginia Supreme Court denied that. What were the costs to my husband and me? 455 days of feeling like we had a gun to our heads, lots of sleepless nights, I gained 20 pounds from stress and we had legal fees that approached $40,000. All for exercising our First Amendment rights and advocating for better schools. I hope you agree that this is an outrage."

Martin was eloquent and prepared. She brought books to share with the legislators. She even quoted the public comments made by the late Dr. Bill Bosher, Distinguished Professor of Public Policy and Education at Virginia Commonwealth University about the lawsuit:

“The truth is we [public school educators] are public servants. Therefore, the public has the opportunity to critique when we're doing well and when they think we're not… The thing that most influences student achievement is parents being involved with their young people and when you want that to happen this [lawsuit] certainly could mute the enthusiasm."
I testified as a former member of the City of Richmond School Board [2002-2008] and as a print journalist who now blogs and freelances commentary pieces about education. I told the subcommittee about the importance of parental involvement in our public schools and how the SLAPP suit brought against the Martins and Contes has had a definite chilling effect on Richmond parents."

I shared that many parents have told me that as much as they wish to be a part of improving the quality of our schools for ALL children, that they absolutely refuse to risk of being sued for speaking on the record about their concerns for their child's education. Questions about whether they would write a letter to any school official about their concerns for their child's education are met with nervous laughter, rolled eyes and "are you crazy?!" looks.

Suffice to say, the subcommittee members seemed moved by our collective testimony. They added language that said that should a SLAPP lawsuit be filed and ultimately dismissed, that the court "may" award reasonable attorney fees to the defendants.

While I appreciate that we live in a litigious nation in which it seems anybody can sue anybody if they believe they have been injured, there is something especially galling about a lawsuit brought by a government official against citizens who dared to ask that official -- or agents of that official -- for "redress of grievances."

The right to petition, whether one stands before a public body or writes a letter concerning a public matter, allows citizens to focus government attention on unresolved ills; provide information to elected leaders about unpopular policies; expose misconduct, waste, corruption, and incompetence and to vent popular frustrations without endangering the public order.

And yet, what made it out of the House Courts and Justice Committee Wednesday essentially gutted HB1117. The only communication currently protected by this bill are statements made before a "public hearing."

How is limiting the immunity of an ordinary citizen to "petition" their government or school officials simply to utterances made in a public hearing not unconstitutional? Why is writing a letter and submitting a petition about an issue of public concern not protected communication?

Burton Jay Rubin, a Virginia lawyer who has written extensively about SLAPP suits, contends that any law that limits the ways that a citizen can petition the government is potentially unconstitutional.

For this reason, the activities of petitioning — writing letters, gathering signatures, circulating fliers, rallying public support — are precisely what the Founding Fathers envisioned when they wrote The Bill of Rights and ought to be protected activities.

Like Rubin, the Founding Fathers and countless other Virginians, I believe “there ought to be a law,” that will specifically prevent public officials from intimidating the very citizens and taxpayers they are supposed to serve by filing abusive lawsuits against them.

It is difficult to imagine anything that strikes more directly at the heart of our form of government than a civil suit brought against a citizen by a public official seeking to suppress or deflect that citizen’s request that the official take some form of governmental action.

And while common sense and Virginia common law already condemn such actions, that has proven not to be enough. Virginians have been getting slapped around long enough. The Virginia General Assembly needs to act. Click here and here to read Rubin's legal analysis that cites extensive Virginia case law as a foundation for including not just words spoken at a public hearing, but written statements as well.

Anti-SLAPP legislation isn’t a Red State or Blue State thing. Twenty-eight states across the nation – as diverse as California and Texas – already have Anti-SLAPP legislation. Virginia’s existing law is so weak, the Commonwealth doesn’t even make the Public Participation Project’s list of states with Anti-SLAPP legislation.

To the General Assembly:
Any citizen of Virginia should have the right to comment on the actions of public officials in the Commonwealth,good or bad, anywhere, any time. To prohibit this is indeed unconstitutional as it violates a citizens right to free speech.

I mirror the comments of Carol Wolf. It was disturbing to watch the course of the lawsuit against those parents who spoke out - as is their right - against a public person and their public - and damaging to members of the public - failings in the dispatch of their public duties.
The rights of the people to hold their public officials accountable should not ever be in question. If an individual aspires to a public job or to public office, they should know that their performance is - and should be - subject to public scrutiny and public critique.

It is imperative that Virginians are protected when they participate in the democratic process. Speaking out truthfully is punishable by our current system which allows frivolous, unwinnable lawsuits to be brought to court. I urge the Virginia General Assembly to do the right thing for the people of Virginia.

Virginians and ALL Americans must be allowed to speak out against institutions and not have to suffer punative and frivolous lawsuits as a result.

One of the finest students in our school system was sued because of the letter she wroteon behalf of her children . It cost her dearly to defend herself in the courts . She was eventually exonerated but she should not have had to put up with the stress or looze financially because of a frivolous lawsuit . This bill is sorely needed .

I am writing in support of this legislation.

I was “SLAPP”ed in Virginia

This legislation is personal to me. In the summer of 2013, my husband and I were among a group of ~50 parents who submitted a letter to the Richmond Public Schools acting superintendent, outlining safety and educational problems at our daughter’s public middle school. RPS School Board member Kim Gray later referred to this letter as being “full of verifiable facts.”

The school principal, who – in my opinion – was seeking revenge for our criticisms and an insurance payout (among other things), sued us for defamation/malice and $3.5 million dollars.

A circuit court judge shut this lawsuit down. Yet the principal appealed it to the Virginia Supreme Court. They shut it down. So she filed a petition for rehearing. The Virginia Supreme Court denied that.

What were the costs to my husband and me? 455 days of feeling like we had a gun to our heads, lots of sleepless nights, I gained 20 pounds from stress and we had legal fees that approached $40,000. All for exercising our First Amendment rights and advocating for better schools. I hope you agree that this is an outrage.

SLAPPs squelch public participation
After our lawsuit became public, the late Dr. Bill Bosher, Distinguished Professor of Public Policy and Education at Virginia Commonwealth University spoke to the media, saying, “The truth is we [public school educators] are public servants. Therefore, the public has the opportunity to critique when we're doing well and when they think we're not… The thing that most influences student achievement is parents being involved with their young people and when you want that to happen this [lawsuit] certainly could mute the enthusiasm."

Here’s a link to that news coverage: http://www.nbc12.com/story/25071150/some-concerned-principals-lawsuit-could-set-precedent

And here are links to dozens of other types of SLAPPs: http://www.anti-slapp.org/slapp-shots/

Please take action
Please take action to protect Virginia citizens who stand up and speak out on matter of public concern.

Anti-SLAPP legislation is bi-partisan
Please understand that Anti-SLAPP legislation isn’t a Red State or Blue State thing. Twenty-eight states across the nation – as diverse as California and Texas – already have Anti-SLAPP legislation. Virginia’s existing law (SB 1250) is so weak, the Commonwealth doesn’t even make the Public Participation Project’s list of states with Anti-SLAPP legislation. It’s time Virginia got on board.

If this is what it takes to protect concerned parents from punishment when they speak out for better education for all our children, then WE MUST PASS THIS BILL.

I believe that all Virginians should be able to speak out about our public institutions without fear of frivolous law suits. Only with this freedom can we be sure that our public institutions will be held accountable .All of our public institutions - but our schools most of all - must be answerable to the very people whom they purport to serve.

It is imperative for this legislation to pass. Democracy depends upon it.

I support this bill. Virginians should not be subjected to frivolous lawsuits when speaking up about public concerns. The Commonwealth will undoubtedly suffer if good-intentioned, involved citizens are silenced.

It is absurd that people concerned about the quality of the public education of their children can be sued for voicing their concerns/complaints/suggestions about their school districts!

I support this legislation. This type of tyranny needs to end.

In Colorado ..., the courts have adopted protections against SLAPPs. The Colorado rules are in favor of 'freedom to speak out' - specifically: An action against a defendant arising out of a defendant’s legitimate petition for redress of grievances under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is subject to summary judgment for the defendant - the ONLY caveat is when 'grievances was primarily for the purpose of harassment or some other improper purpose'. Other states have addressed these same issues and Virginia should, too! [see:http://www.anti-slapp.org/your-states-free-speech-protection/#C]

I support this legislation. When I became a public servant it was understood that taking criticism was part of the job. Citizens have a right to express opinions and to speak on issues whether we agree with them or not.

People should be free to petition their government without fear of punitive lawsuits.

This legislation is critical for public discourse. Citizens should be encouraged to participate for the common good. It is absurd that our system allows a public official to sue for personal gain when the greater good is trying to be served. We all lose if voices are quelled that would better the community.

People who exercise their 1st Amendment rights should be able to do so without fear of reprisal and/or economic harm. Free expression is not free, so long as it cannot be exercised without fear.

Virginia must protect people who participate in our democracy.

It seems to me that government of the people, for the people and by the people requires the involvement of... the people. Obviously there were no merits to the suit that inspired this proposed legislation, but what was the downside for the plaintiff? Having serious legal and financial consequences in place to prevent frivolous suits only make sense. More time for the courts to consider serious cases and a more involved citizenry.

The freedoms this country is founded on, includes the freedom of speech and opinion.
I support this legislation!

My good friends got SLAPPed for exercising their right to free speech, something Americans hold so dear. I pity the next person this happens to who speaks out, and then likely faces financial ruin.

I think the protections offered in this bill are important to the functioning of a civil society. Citizens must be free to criticize public services without being SLAPPed. Standard defamation laws still apply, but there needs to be some balance when lawsuits are dismissed without merit.

I cannot believe that we actually need a law for this--but we do, because people exercising their 1st-Amendment rights are being targeted with frivolous, absurd, and costly law suits, in an effort to silence free speech. Please pass these bills into law.

Virginia should protect its citizens from frivolous lawsuits when exercising their rights to free speech. Public servants assume their jobs knowing that they will have a degree of scrutiny by those they serve, and should welcome open dialogue with constituents. Anti-SLAPP legislation against punitive lawsuits exists in 28 states already and should be passed in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Our citizens deserve the respect and protection that SB577 affords.

Exercising one's right to free speech is fundamental to a functional democracy. I stand in support of SB577.

I support this bill. The parents suffered greatly all because they were doing what was right for our schools. I don't want to see this happen to anyone. The parents should be compensated.

I support SB577 and echo Carol Wolf's comments above. It is abominable that a Principle, a public servant, is so lacking in principles that they would sue parents for criticizing their parental taxpaying funded job! And to rub their nose in it by constantly appealing it is nothing short of revenge that the rest of us had to pay for! That principle should be immediately fired and blackballed from ever being a principal again. The state should pay back the cost of those parents to defend themselves agagainst such odious revenge.

This legislation would redeem and strengthen our voice as a polity. Now -- more than ever -- the rights of citizens to speak out, expose the truth, to communicate earnestly with bureaucracies, government agents, administrators, policy-makers, ruling bodies and individuals at every level must be defended! We must be able to have constructive and civil discourse in good faith, secure in the knowledge that this fundamental right is not only protected, but encouraged. I support public engagement always, and I believe that along with transparency and accountability, it remains the only way towards progress.

My daughter attended the middle school in question, when the acting principal rashly filed lawsuit in reaction to a sincere effort on the part of many parents to address chronic problems at the school. Neither my husband nor I were signatories of the letter, however, due in large part to our fears that there would be backlash. Although we could have added serious grievances of our own, we did not participate because of worries that such actions would cause repercussions to the academic opportunities for current students. We indeed felt constricted in our ability to speak out. We definitely felt a "keep your head down, do your time and get out" mentality -- one that flew in the very face of teaching our children to become knowledgable, vocal participants in the community, empowering them with agency and responsibility for their own actions. Our kids should know that advocacy -- whether for their own education or for any other worthwhile cause -- can still be expressed powerfully and they will not be ruined by it. The parents who bravely and effectively spoke out, in classic epistolary manner, have my gratitude. Especially now, because their efforts have brought about SB577.

A parent of 2 RPS children, one of whom, graduated from this MS in 2012, the letter was written in 2013.

Sign this bill. Parents have needed a voice and these four & 50 and future individuals should not bear the cost of a hammer to nail, when easily hundreds of parents before them attempted, individally, to bring attention to a situation that necessitated more immediate attention form RPS and the Lucille Brown Middle School.

Our institutions and our systems are failing us if they 'prosecute' those who rise up and call out, to make our institutions and systems better.

Is this something that we are actually debating? This is a no brained if there ever was one.

Parents should be able to suggest changes to their child's school without fear of being sued by the administration. Please pass this legislation to keep parents engaged in schools.

I watched in disbelief as my friends were sued for speaking out against chronic problems within the RPS. Disbelief became outrage as this Principal (and her misguided attorney) continued to appeal and appeal a baseless case. These involved and caring families were put through months of anxiety, stress and financial strain for simply pointing out their concerns. We need to be supporting the parents to DO get involved in their children's education, not punishing them.
I stand in support of SB577.

Public officials should not be able to censor or punish free speech.

It is a shame we even need such legislation, but we do.

If we can't hold public officials accountable, what kind of democracy do we live in? Sad that we have to protect our civil rights. I support this bill.

Even the American Bar Association, hardly a bastion of liberalism or radical politics, supports anti-SLAPP legislation. In August 2012, the ABA adopted the following RESOLUTION:

RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association encourages federal, state and territorial legislatures to enact legislation to protect individuals and organizations who choose to speak on matters of public concern from meritless litigation designed to suppress such speech, commonly known as SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation).

REPORT
Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, or SLAPPs, are brought not to vindicate legal rights, but to harass and intimidate, and to divert attention and resources from the underlying civic issue. Such lawsuits turn the justice system into a weapon, and have a serious chilling effect on the free speech that is so vital to the public interest. Even a meritless suit can drag on for months – sometimes even years – and tactics such as aggressive discovery can pile on the costs.

The best protection against SLAPPs is a method to quickly dismiss suits that arise from protected speech – and the ability to recover the fees, costs and damages incurred in defending the meritless suit. Twenty-eight states, the District of Columbia and the territory of Guam have enacted legislation to protect against SLAPPs, but these vary in their strength and breadth. Moreover, there is no federal anti-SLAPP protection. Anti-SLAPP legislation is needed at a federal level to consistently protect the citizens of all states. Further, those states that have not adopted such legislation to protect the First Amendment rights of their citizens need to adopt similar legislation in order to preserve our democracy.

Generally, state anti-SLAPP laws share four basic goals: (1) to provide as a matter of substantive law a statutory immunity for statements (and expressive conduct) on matters of public concern, where the plaintiff is unable to establish a prima facie case supporting his or her cause of action; (2) to furnish a suggested procedural framework that encourages and facilitates prompt and inexpensive resolution of such SLAPP claims; (3) to provide a right of immediate appeal of a trial court ruling on an anti-SLAPP motion; and (4) to require appropriate reimbursement for the targets of SLAPP lawsuits. Anti-SLAPP laws also provide a mechanism for meritorious claims to survive this stage of the litigation.

Virginians must be free to petition their government without fear of punitive lawsuits.

I support this bill and Virginian's right to protect basic civil rights as well as catching up to the several states that already have this common sense legislation in place.

I stand in support of SB577. We must be free to petition our government and to act as involved citizens in a democracy without fear retribution and punitive lawsuits.

I support SB577. People should be free to petition their government without fear of punitive lawsuits.

I support citizens' right to petition their government without fear of frivolous and expensive lawsuits. I support SB577.

I support SB577. Parents should be able to recommend improvements to their child's school and share well documented problems without fear of being sued in a frivolous and punitive lawsuit.

Just as there are laws to protect whistle-blowers who try to right wrongs, these bills have to be passed. These obnoxious and expensive SLAPP suits are begun for spite, for revenge or for personal gain by the plaintiffs. Their hope is that they will wear down the defendants. That the defendants will either settle out of court or just flat out quit-- give in. The plaintiffs bringing the suit don't always seem to care if they win or not. They just want to annoy the very dickens out of the defendants and cause them great financial and mental stress. But when the suits are repeatedly thrown out as frivolous and the plaintiff continues to appeal, then the burden of attorney fees and legal costs should, by right, fall on the plaintiff and not the defendant(s). The great Commonwealth of Virginia, where most of our Constitutional rights and beliefs originated, should not be party to these suits. Let's give some financial and mental stress to the plaintiffs and see how long they pursue these SLAPP suits. These bills must be passed.

Our constitution gives us the right to petition our government. In 2013, I was SLAPPed by the owner of a neighborhood coffee shop for appearing before the Planning Commission in opposition to changes to a Special Use Permit. At that meeting, I praised the business but opposed the changes because they reneged on an agreement that was made in 2004 between the property owner and the neighbors not to sell alcohol. I was sued for 3.5 million dollars and attacked in print and broadcast media. The chilling and intended effect of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, is that people hesitate about speaking out. They take a public, municipal issue and make it personal. One of the things that makes our country and commonwealth great is the right to address our government on issues that concern us. Isn't that what democracy is all about! Please support this legislation. Please support this fundamental right to openly participate in government without fear of malicious retribution.

I support citizens' right to petition their government without fear of frivolous and expensive lawsuits. I support SB577.

Please consider taking the clutter out of our courts. Support ANTI slapp legislation

A government for the people cannot work if the people are punished for participating.
SB577 is needed. I urge you to support. Thanks.

Virginia must protect people who participate in our democracy. It is ridiculous to even debate this. I support SB577.

It is a shame that caring parents who simply want to improve their children's public education can't voice their concerns without fear of being punished for it! Please consider passing this bill for the sake of all of our children!

Critical thinking and discussion about it are how things improve- PERIOD. If we are not afforded that right as citizens of the Commonwealth, we are doomed as a society.

No change has ever been made without those people affected speaking up. Please help safeguard a parent's right to voice their concerns in order to bring light to important issues. We should be encouraging effective engagement, not bullying parents into keeping quiet with threats of financially draining lawsuits. Please support this bill.

As a mom whose children attend the very school situation that brought this whole issue to light, I cannot heartily express enough the need, the RIGHT, to be able to speak freely and openly about public servants (and those not serving as they should) without fear of punitive reprisal.

For the families of those in public schools, and for those further-reaching situations, I implore you to support anti-SLAPP legislation.

I was a victim of a SLAPP suit because I spoke up against a special use permit (SUP) at a city council meeting. My reward was to be sued for 3.5 million dollars. Many of my co-defendants were covered for their attorney fees by home owners insurance. In my case since I don't own a home I was on the hook for all the expenses. The bill that is before the legislature includes a provision that the judge MAY award attorneys fees. I think this is the critical part of the bill because SLAPP suits are as their name S(strategic)L(lawsuit)A(against)P(public)P(participation) designed to stop people from petitioning their government.
The entire neighborhood was against the special use permit and signed petitions, attended meeting etc. They also know what happened to those of us who spoke at the council meeting. What do you think will happen if the SUP is re-introduced? The SLAPP suit will have served it's purpose even though the suit was dismissed with prejudice.
If the defendants were all awarded fees this merit-less suit would have been very expensive for the plaintiff. This bill will have the effect of discouraging people from bringing baseless lawsuits in an effort to stifle free speech.

On Jan 25th during the Committee for Courts of Justice meeting, it was agreed to amend VA Code § 8.01-223.2. Immunity of persons at public hearing to contain “Any person who has a suit against him dismissed pursuant to the immunity provided by this section shall be awarded reasonable attorney fees and costs.”

Two(2) HB0690 HB1117 proposals by members of the House were heard and combined as HB1117 to move forward. There is a Senate proposal SB577 which was also heard; and then, a finalized format again heard by the Courts of Justice prior to moving forward for enactment. The merged format is next to be heard by the Senate. It is predicted as long as this amendment stays on track, it will become law by July 1, 2016.

As a person who is presently affected by the filing of a SLAPP suite, I'm soliciting your support to ensure the amendment becomes reality. I'm also contacting you to make you aware similar effort is in progress at the Federal level; and again, solicit your support that amendments and laws which protect 1st amendment rights of those of us who participate in public assembly/events are ensured of our constitutional rights without fear of dealing with a SLAPP are enact.

The Federal pending legislation is HR 2304, Free Speech Act of 2015. While the impetus of a growing number of SLAPPs are aimed at Web-based businesses, such complaints affect anyone who speaks out (or has legal counsel speak out) in a forum for the public to discuss, rate and/or criticize the world around them. The proposal of Free Speech Act of 2015 — HR 2304 by Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Texas) — has at least two dozen cosponsors. Borrowing heavily from California's law and a similar statute in Texas, this bill allows people sued in federal court or in states with little protection against SLAPPs to have a federal judge dismiss frivolous claims based on speech "made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public concern."

Why am I a candidate for your assistance? Since 2011, a battle has occur in Henrico County in central Virginia between legacy property rights of a 'family subdivision' and its private road and expansion of the Islamic Center of Richmond (ICR). This battle is not about freedom to worship protected under the First Amendment and federal laws granting exemption waivers from local land zoning laws. Instead it is about abuse of the courts through lawfare to lay claim to property and property rights through adverse possession - harassment, intimidation and filing of frivolous complaints which allege participation in public land use hearings are a 'business conspiracy'.

As a result of 'lawfare' enabled by Henrico County's civil system, I've become a 'poster child' for why the state of VA as well as Federal level needs antiSLAPP laws. So, I was involved in an effort spear headed by Christopher Peace, member VA House of Delegates, to ensure such legislation becomes reality for the state of VA; and am also soliciting assistance at the Federal level, too. If such legislation exist, it could provide the much needed opportunity for a federal judge to dismiss frivolous claims based on alleged speech "made in connection with an official proceeding or about a matter of public concern."

The Virginia Institute has made a choice to 'stand with me' in the protection of my legacy Virginia property rights. Won't you? I respectfully request your support for amendment to VA Code § 8.01-223.2 as well as proposed law - HR 2304. You are welcome to share the enclosed information with others as appropriate.

In Henrico County they like to slap me around. someone at the Republican Breakfast has the power to send the cops to check on me under the ruse of a welfare check. Someone keeps telling them I am out of line..... Funny I don't even ask questions out of fear if I do that person will make my life hell. So I record and I post my audio of the meetings and even when I speak to them to protect myself against this continued Henrico Way of harassement. In our county they try to shut you up if you ask questions like
Why does a new car get inspected but not an 25 year or older piece of crap Antique Taged vehicle.

Like Why do I pay the meals tax on coffee

Like why are teachers and students parking in our schools parking lots tagged from Texas, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland and in violation to avoid paying the car tax?

Why are people towing homemade trailers that are never inspected every year in front of my family.

Why in Henrioc over 75% of all trailers being towed don't have working taillights but the cops know how to follow me to make sure mine work

Memo I now carry spare lights at all times

In Henrico you ask questions in a respectful manner the government harasses you

Frivolous lawsuits against concerned citizens are an attempt to silence the voices of those that seek to reveal wrong doing. Intimidation like this must be stopped !