Appeal of Conviction Delays Jail in Internet Forgery Case

, New York Law Journal


A judge said Monday a blogger can stay out of jail for the time being as his attorney appeals his conviction for criminally impersonating his father's academic rivals over the origins of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

  • Quixote

    There are several inaccuracies in this article which merit correction.

    First, the most serious charges facing Golb were not aggravated harassment, but two felony "identity theft" convictions, both of which were also vacated by the appellate courts. The aggravated harassment charges, however, seem to have been particularly important, in that they were apparently used to poison the trial atmosphere and criminalize Golb‘s entire Internet campaign on the grounds that it was "annoying."

    Second, Golb did not acknowledge trying to "discredit scholars." He acknowledged inappropriately using satirical mimicry to expose the perceived misconduct (including alleged plagiarism and other dishonest practices) of certain academics. That is an entirely different matter, which perhaps merits more attention than it has received in the New York Law Journal.

    Third, Golb‘s complaint seems to have been not that certain academics disagreed with his father, but that they were concealing the current state of research and suppressing debate in museum exhibits. That is another point that is quite obviously relevant to Golb‘s First Amendment argument; hence one must hope that it will receive ample treatment in further coverage of this matter in the Journal.

    Finally, it is not Criminal Court judge Laura Ward, but First Appellate Division Justice Helen Freedman, who stayed Golb‘s surrender date.

    All of this information is documented on the website devoted to this case:

    The site is well put together and features some rather astonishing details from the trial that seem to have been ignored by the media. When we send someone to jail, let‘s at least be clear about why we‘re doing it.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202664043017

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.