Local attorney Arthur Cantu is embroiled in an Internet lawsuit
with an unknown individual using the pseudonym Sara Jones, who
first stepped onto the San Benito County scene with a letter to the
editor in the Free Lance on Nov. 18, 2003.
”
In this letter Sara Jones was posing as this government employee
to give herself credibility, and made disparaging remarks about
(former district attorney) Harry Damkar, and about myself too,
”
Cantu said.
”
So we thought we should put a stop to Sara Jones giving false
statements, because she victimized not only me and a former elected
official, she also victimized the Free Lance and the community.
”
Local attorney Arthur Cantu is embroiled in an Internet lawsuit with an unknown individual using the pseudonym Sara Jones, who first stepped onto the San Benito County scene with a letter to the editor in the Free Lance on Nov. 18, 2003.
“In this letter Sara Jones was posing as this government employee to give herself credibility, and made disparaging remarks about (former district attorney) Harry Damkar, and about myself too,” Cantu said. “So we thought we should put a stop to Sara Jones giving false statements, because she victimized not only me and a former elected official, she also victimized the Free Lance and the community.”
The letter was printed concerning the past behavior and tenure of Damkar, the current state of affairs at the District Attorney’s Office run by John Sarsfield, with Cantu thrown into the mix who, at the time, was involved with the highly publicized Robert Orabuena trial.
The letter, signed by Sara M. Jones of Hollister, claimed that Jones was a former office assistant for Damkar who made it difficult for his employees to do their jobs because he “knew he would shortly be working with the opposing side,” the letter said.
Jones also thanked Sarsfield for taking control of the District Attorney’s office, and chastised Cantu for his actions while defending Orabuena and for using the “race card” in his defense, it said.
There is no record of a Sara M. Jones in Hollister and no such person ever worked in Damkar’s office, Cantu said. Sara M. Jones was a pseudonym for someone in the county who preferred to remain anonymous.
“Our policy is to always call and verify signed letter writers,” said Executive Editor Mike Fitzgerald. “But this one unfortunately slipped through.”
By using Jones’ e-mail address, Cantu began an investigation into who Jones’ alter-ego is.
“We subpoenaed Microsoft Hotmail and we got interesting and unique information,” Cantu said. “We got four Internet provider numbers, and those numbers will likely triangulate to just one person.”
With those numbers, using a reverse registry, Cantu identified Pacific Bell Internet Services as the original Internet provider (IP), and subpoenaed their records, he said.
Just before the deadline to produce those records, he was served anonymously with a motion to quash his subpoena – from an anonymous law firm and the anonymous and fictitious client Sara Jones, he said.
With more investigation he discovered that the motion originated at the San Jose law firm of Hopkins & Carley. By process of elimination and by talking to a person at the carrier service that hand-delivered the motion, he concluded that two attorneys who have experience with case law involving freedom of speech filed it, he said.
He confirmed that attorneys Daniel Pyne III and Tracy Loftesness of Hopkins & Carley had been retained by Jones to make sure her true identify remained undisclosed.
“I’ve never seen anything like this,” he said. “It goes back to the Federalist Papers before the U.S. was even born – citing Federal law, citing Supreme Court Justice case law – basically using the U.S. Constitution and the freedom of speech to try and protect somebody who’s basically a liar.”
Included in her motion, Jones includes background as to why she e-mailed the Free Lance the letter in the first place.
Although in her original letter she stated that she was an office assistant during Damkar’s time as district attorney, in her motion she states that she is unaware of anyone by the name of Sara M. Jones living in Hollister, and used it to protect her identity, according to the motion.
“The Free Lance sent me a reply e-mail… requesting my name and phone number, but I declined to provide it after already having learned that my e-mail had generated a number of heated responses,” the motion stated.
The motion goes on to site anonymous letters published in the Free Lance concerning the Orabuena case, published news articles and editorials.
“Now Mr. Cantu has sued me, under my pseudonym Sara M. Jones, for participating in this ongoing public discussion about the prosecution of Mr. Orabuena,” the motion stated. “Mr. Cantu apparently claims, based on his choice of slander, libel and defamation of character as causes of action, that my limited statements about his ‘desperate’ use of the ‘race card’ are false factual assertions.”
In response to Cantu’s suit and the subpoena, Jones’ motion is two-fold: to quash the subpoena and to strike his complaint, according to the motion.
“Granting both motions will ensure the continued protection of the freedoms guaranteed to me and all persons by the United States and California constitutions to engage in anonymous or pseudonymous political speech,” the motion stated.
Protecting freedom of speech, whether with a disclosed identity or anonymously, is a basic right that the Constitution grants, but it is not intended to protect people who give false statements, Cantu said.
As part of his argument, he cites 538a of the California Penal Code, which states that it is a misdemeanor to sign a letter addressed to a newspaper with the name other than himself, leading the paper to believe that the letter was written by the person whose name is on it, according to the penal code.
“The U.S. Constitution, the Supreme Court, and cases and codes are all very clear that you cannot use free speech as a protection for people who give false statements,” Cantu said. “It’s intended to protect honest free speech.”
Whoever holds claim to Jones’ true identity is going to great steps to have it remain veiled, Cantu said. While he doesn’t know who Jones really is, he speculates that it is someone close to the public eye who definitely has personal anger toward himself and Damkar, he said.
“I think this person is extremely concerned about the price Sara Jones will pay when she’s finally exposed,” he said. “If it was just some person off the street, (the price) would likely be low, but as you move up the ladder of your professionalism, the price goes higher if you’ve done something like this.”
The case will be brought before San Benito County Superior Court Judge Steven Sanders on Feb. 2, where Jones’ motion to quash will either be upheld or denied.
If denied, Cantu will be privy to the records that he believes will lead him to the true identity of Jones, he said.
If he receives the records, with that information and by cross-referencing the IP numbers, they should relate back to the actual computer as well as the user, he said.
“That information should answer the question of who Sara Jones is,” Cantu said. “You might be able to say that three people have access to that computer, but when you have several (of the same IP numbers) you can no longer say those three people sent all of them.”
Several anonymous letters published in the Free Lance have stated that Sarsfield may be the mysterious Jones.
He vehemently denies any connection with anything having to do with Jones.
“It’s not me,” Sarsfield said. “Obviously Mr. Cantu has a lot of free time on his hands. I have little or no confidence in any legal pronouncements by Mr. Cantu… and I take nothing that he says seriously.”
Damkar, who isn’t involved with the suit, concedes that the past year has been filled with anonymous people attacking individuals, and commends Cantu for taking action against it.
“I would hope that people who used either the papers or the legal system to launch anonymous attacks could be revealed,” Damkar said. “It could say a lot about the character of the person and legitimacy of the arguments made.”
Pyne could not be reached for comment, and Loftesness did not return phone calls.
