Curley v. NAMBLA
Encyclopedia
Curley v. NAMBLA was a wrongful death lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
in 2000, by Barbara and Robert Curley against the North American Man/Boy Love Association
(NAMBLA). The American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU) represented NAMBLA and was successful in getting the suit dismissed. The Curleys continued the suit as a wrongful death action against individual NAMBLA members and NAMBLA Steering Committee members. The Curleys dropped the lawsuit in 2008 because the plaintiffs had only one witness prepared to testify that NAMBLA somehow incited one of the convicted criminals but a judge ruled the witness was not competent to testify.
According to columnist Wendy Kaminer, the case highlighted censorship of unpopular speech about sexuality and the "widespread biases about a supposed link between homosexuality and pedophilia" as children are more likely to be preyed upon by heterosexuals in their extended families. The case heightened the gay communities disassociation with NAMBLA and even appearances of supporting pederasty (attraction to adolescents after they enter puberty
) and pedophilia (attraction to prepubescent children), a division that was even present in NAMBLA as to their public image and publication(s) content. The case also nearly brought the death penalty back to Massachusetts.
to the U.S. Constitution
standards that govern words in any medium. At the time the Internet was much less popular so the point rested on the courts viewing the Internet as such a different media as to warrant a different legal standard. Despite claims, the website had no erotica, conspiracies to rape or incitements to violence. In Brandenburg v. Ohio
, , the US Supreme Court
held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless it is directed to inciting and likely to incite imminent lawless action
. In September 2001 summary judgment
was declined because Brandenburg doctrine "does not foreclose liability 'on any set of facts that might be shown'" as to incitement just by NAMBLA's publications, meetings and website. The Curleys ultimately dropped the lawsuit in 2008 because they only had one witness prepared to testify that NAMBLA "somehow spurred" Jaynes to commit crimes but a judge ruled the witness was not competent to testify.
United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts is the federal district court whose jurisdiction is the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, USA. The first court session was held in Boston in 1789. The second term was held in Salem in 1790 and until 1813 court session locations...
in 2000, by Barbara and Robert Curley against the North American Man/Boy Love Association
North American Man/Boy Love Association
The North American Man/Boy Love Association is a pedophile and pederasty advocacy organization in the United States that works to abolish age of consent laws criminalizing adult sexual involvement with minors, and for the release of all men who have been jailed for sexual contacts with minors that...
(NAMBLA). The American Civil Liberties Union
American Civil Liberties Union
The American Civil Liberties Union is a U.S. non-profit organization whose stated mission is "to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States." It works through litigation, legislation, and...
(ACLU) represented NAMBLA and was successful in getting the suit dismissed. The Curleys continued the suit as a wrongful death action against individual NAMBLA members and NAMBLA Steering Committee members. The Curleys dropped the lawsuit in 2008 because the plaintiffs had only one witness prepared to testify that NAMBLA somehow incited one of the convicted criminals but a judge ruled the witness was not competent to testify.
According to columnist Wendy Kaminer, the case highlighted censorship of unpopular speech about sexuality and the "widespread biases about a supposed link between homosexuality and pedophilia" as children are more likely to be preyed upon by heterosexuals in their extended families. The case heightened the gay communities disassociation with NAMBLA and even appearances of supporting pederasty (attraction to adolescents after they enter puberty
Puberty
Puberty is the process of physical changes by which a child's body matures into an adult body capable of reproduction, as initiated by hormonal signals from the brain to the gonads; the ovaries in a girl, the testes in a boy...
) and pedophilia (attraction to prepubescent children), a division that was even present in NAMBLA as to their public image and publication(s) content. The case also nearly brought the death penalty back to Massachusetts.
Background
Barbara and Robert Curley's 10-year-old son Jeffrey was the victim of a 1997 kidnap, rape and murder by two men, Salvatore Sicari, twenty-one, and Charlie Jaynes, twenty-two. Jeffrey was a latchkey child and knew Sicari who lived only a block away, the two men befriended Jeffrey taking him on car rides to dinners. They offered to replace his recently stolen bicycle with a new one for sex but the boy refused and Jaynes killed Jeffrey in the car's backseat. Sicari confessed to his part in the murder but insisted Jaynes was the killer, NAMBLA literature and a membership card was also found in the backseat of the car and in Jaynes' apartment. Both were charged and found guilty of child molestation, kidnapping and murder.Lawsuit
According to the Curleys' $200 million suit, NAMBLA's "adult-child sexual relationship" propaganda, including Jaynes' viewing the group's website, caused the violent predatory behavior and urge to have sex with and rape young male children. Proving the incitement is difficult given the First AmendmentFirst Amendment to the United States Constitution
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering...
to the U.S. Constitution
United States Constitution
The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the United States of America. It is the framework for the organization of the United States government and for the relationship of the federal government with the states, citizens, and all people within the United States.The first three...
standards that govern words in any medium. At the time the Internet was much less popular so the point rested on the courts viewing the Internet as such a different media as to warrant a different legal standard. Despite claims, the website had no erotica, conspiracies to rape or incitements to violence. In Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio, , was a landmark United States Supreme Court case based on the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless it is directed to inciting and likely to incite imminent lawless action...
, , the US Supreme Court
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless it is directed to inciting and likely to incite imminent lawless action
Imminent lawless action
"Imminent lawless action" is a standard currently used, and that was established by the United States Supreme Court in Brandenburg v. Ohio , for defining the limits of freedom of speech. Brandenburg clarified what constituted a "clear and present danger", the standard established by Schenck v....
. In September 2001 summary judgment
Summary judgment
In law, a summary judgment is a determination made by a court without a full trial. Such a judgment may be issued as to the merits of an entire case, or of specific issues in that case....
was declined because Brandenburg doctrine "does not foreclose liability 'on any set of facts that might be shown'" as to incitement just by NAMBLA's publications, meetings and website. The Curleys ultimately dropped the lawsuit in 2008 because they only had one witness prepared to testify that NAMBLA "somehow spurred" Jaynes to commit crimes but a judge ruled the witness was not competent to testify.