A Manhattan judge ruled earlier today that Tweets are fair game to be subpoenaed, after a handful of OWS protesters received notice from the DA that their messages of 140 characters or less were considered evidence. Protester Malcolm Harris' attorney had argued that the Manhattan DA's office's request violated his client's privacy and free association rights, but the judge disagreed, and used Twitter hashtags in the first paragraph of his ruling. "The defendant moved to #quash that subpoena. That motion is #denied," Justice Matthew Sciarrino, Jr. wrote.
"The NYPD and Manhattan DA's office are on a fishing expedition for any incriminating evidence, which they have yet to find," Justin Wedes told the WSJ, which is largely true: authorities have found no "smoking tweet," if you will, of any wrongdoing on the thousands of Tweets that were requested in relation to the arrests on the Brooklyn Bridge in October. "It is an attempt by the DA's office to use a sledgehammer to squash a gnat," Harris' attorney Martin Stolar says. "It's a little overkill."
Harris told New York Magazine today, "Using a Harvard Law trained ADA's time prosecuting non-violent protesters is an outrageous and disappointing use of state funds."
