COLUMBUS — A federal judge has thrown out much of an online news outlet’s press freedom lawsuit against the Pike County Sheriff’s Office. He has narrowed the main focus of the suit to the question of whether the agency had probable cause to arrest the outlet’s editor, after he published an article based on an illegally obtained recording of witness testimony in a murder trial.
In an opinion and order filed June 27, U.S. District Judge Michael H. Watson granted a request by the sheriff’s office to dismiss all claims in the lawsuit against Sheriff Tracy Evans, as well as all claims made on behalf of the Scioto Valley Guardian and its parent company NewsPatrol, Inc.. Watson did not dismiss the claims brought in the lawsuit on behalf of Guardian Editor in Chief Derek J. Myers, but has told the parties to submit more evidence and arguments on what the judge apparently sees as the pivotal issue remaining in the case — the legitimacy of Myers’ arrest for wiretapping.
Myers, the Guardian and News Patrol filed suit in December 2023 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division. They named as defendants Pike County, Sheriff Evans, and two sheriff’s deputies, suing the three officers in both their personal and professional capacities.
The complaint was the result of a story that ran in the Guardian in October 2022, about the then-ongoing trial of George Wagner IV in Pike County Common Pleas Court. Wagner was one of four members of his family who were charged in connection with the 2016 execution-style killing of eight members of the Rhoden family in Pike County, in a case that has gotten heavy media coverage around the region and state.
The judge hearing the trial ordered that any witness could choose not to be photographed, or to have their testimony either audio- or video recorded, and if a witness made this request, reporters in the courtroom were forbidden to use recording devices during that witness’s testimony.
The defendant’s brother, Edward “Jake” Wagner, asked not to be recorded, activating the judge’s order. On Oct. 28, 2022, however, the Guardian ran a story over Myers’ byline that was based on a recording of some of Wagner’s testimony.
According to the lawsuit, the recording was provided by an unidentified source, and no one connected with the Guardian took part in, encouraged, caused, or helped in the making of the recording.
After the story ran, however, sheriff’s officers arrested Myers for wiretapping, and seized his laptop and cell phone. The resulting lawsuit alleged that these actions violated the plaintiffs’ freedoms of speech and the press, and constituted malicious prosecution, unreasonable search and seizure, and violation of the Privacy Protection Act.
In his recent opinion and order, Judge Watson agreed with arguments by the defendants that all claims against Evans, and all claims on behalf of the Guardian and NewsPatrol, should be dismissed.
Regarding claims against Evans, the judge noted that the plaintiffs have not included any allegations in their lawsuit saying that the sheriff was personally involved in any of the alleged civil rights violations, other than stating that he was sheriff when they took place, and claiming, without specifics, that he “pushed” the county prosecutor into pursuing charges against Myers. These aren’t sufficient to support any claims against Evans, Watson found.
As for the claims by the Guardian and NewsPatrol, Watson agreed with the defendants that the lawsuit contains no allegations that the news outlet suffered any injuries from Myers’ arrest and the seizure of his laptop and cell phone, other than arguing that by arresting Myers and confiscating his electronics, the sheriff’s office interfered with his ability to do his job.
“However, plaintiffs provide no allegations for how the Guardian’s business was disrupted, whether there were other electronics Myers could use to perform his work, or whether any other employees could cover for Myers while he was out because of defendants’ actions,” the judge wrote, concluding that the plaintiffs “do not plausibly allege that the Guardian suffered an injury-in-fact” from any violations of Myers’ rights.
Addressing the remaining claims in the lawsuit, Watson says that at their heart is the question of whether the officers had probable cause to arrest Myers, and seize and search his phone and computer. The answer to this question, he suggests, may determine the outcome of the lawsuit.
Therefore the judge says, he plans to treat what is left of the defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings as a motion for partial summary judgment, addressing only the question of whether the defendants had probable cause for the arrest and seizures.
He gives the defense until Sept. 6 to submit a summary judgment motion along these lines, and the plaintiffs until Oct. 11 to reply to it.
In addition to serving as the Guardian’s editor, Myers ran unsuccessfully for Ohio’s 2nd District U.S House seat in the March 19 Republican primary.
Email at jphillips@logandaily.com
Most Popular
Comments / 0