Politico reports that ACORN and fired ACORN employees Tanja Thompson and Shera Williams have filed suit in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City against Breitbart.com and filmmakers James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles:
In the complaint, ACORN alleges that the filmmakers entered into the organization's offices in July with a "hidden camera and microphone" and taped employees Tonja Thompson and Shera Williams. Both employees are listed as plaintiffs on the complaint, filed in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City.
The crux of the lawsuit centers around a Maryland law which makes it illegal to tape someone without their consent – ACORN is alleging O'Keefe and Giles did so. ACORN is asking for $500,000 in damages to be awarded to each of the employees filmed by O'Keefe and Giles, and ACORN itself wants $1 million in damages.
Breitbart.com, one of the suit's defendants, is run by conservative activist Andrew Breitbart, whose Web site BigGovernment.com first posted most of O'Keefe and Giles' videos. Breitbart has appeared on television with the filmmaking duo, and has a content-sharing relationship with the Drudge Report.
The specific statutes listed in the complaint are Md. Cts. and Jud. Proceedings §§ 10-402(a) and 10-410. Section 10-402(a), in part, states, "it is unlawful for any person to: (1) Wilfully intercept, endeavor to intercept…, any wire, oral, or electronic communication." In addition, the statute states it is unlawful to "wifully disclose" or "use" the "contents of any … communication…," obtained through the interception. Section 10-401, the definition section, adds some color to the verbiage. Section 10-410, the penalty provision of the statute, entitles the defendant to recover:
(1) Actual damages but not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of $100 a day for each day of violation or $1,000, whichever is higher;
(2) Punitive damages; and
(3) A reasonable attorney's fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred.
In fact, plaintiffs are suing defendants jointly and severally for compensatory damages of $500,000 for the individual defendants, and $1 million for ACORN; "liquidated damages of $1,000 per plaintiff against all defendants, jointly and severally; punitive damages in the amount of $1 million per defendant; plus reasonable attorney's fees and other litigation costs. …"
The suit is ironic for two reasons. One, over the weekend ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis said: "I have to thank the undercover folks because they sort of did us a good service." How is suing those that performed "a good service" for you and demanding millions of dollars from them a thank you? Second, why is ACORN so quick to jump back into bed with the two former employees they fired because, to quote an ACORN official, they "did not meet ACORN's standards of professionalism"? Filing a lawsuit as a co-plaintiff is not a very effective way for ACORN to disassociate itself from its disgraced former employees
RNLA Chair David Norcross responded to the news of the suit with the following quote:
We must ask ourselves, when is enough, enough? ACORN claims to be taking the potentially criminal allegations against it seriously, yet instead of embracing real, meaningful reform, it chooses to blame the messenger. Where there is smoke, there is fire. ACORN has been engaged in fraudulent voter registration for years, they have wasted and abused taxpayer dollars, they have maligned their own members when they spoke out against the corruption within the organization, and now they are suing the individuals who exposed additional, illegal behavior. ACORN should view the current situation as an opportunity to truly reform itself and place the interests of its members first, and they can start by re-examining the report by Elizabeth Kingsley and addressing the malfeasance and dysfunction running rampant within their organization.
