By Richard Luthmann

In a case that blurs the lines between free speech and criminal threats, Paul Boyne, a blogger known for his controversial posts on TheFamilyCourtCircus.com, has made an explosive claim: Former Connecticut Supreme Court Justice Joette Katz is secretly orchestrating his prosecution.

Boyne, who is currently in jail facing multiple stalking charges, asserts that Katz is "running" the investigation against him in an effort to silence his harsh criticisms of the Connecticut judicial system.

Boyne’s accusations emerged during an interview with investigative journalist Richard Luthmann on The Unknown Podcast, where Boyne revealed that discovery materials from his case include emails and notes suggesting Katz’s direct involvement.

“She’s running the investigation, and I have the proof,” Boyne said, alleging that Katz has been pulling the strings behind his legal battle.

Katz: A Powerhouse in Connecticut Law

Joette Katz, a former state Supreme Court Justice and former Commissioner of the Department of Children and Families (DCF), is a powerful figure in Connecticut’s legal world. Currently a partner at Shipman & Goodwin LLP, Katz is well-known for her outspoken views on hate speech and judicial accountability.

Boyne believes that Katz’s influence over the Connecticut legal system is central to his prosecution, which he says is not about stalking but about suppressing his free speech.

Photo byRichard Luthmann / Substack

According to Boyne, discovery materials include an April 2022 email with a note stating "Katz speak to only." He claims this is proof that Katz has been involved in decisions about his case from the outset. Boyne has long been critical of Connecticut family court judges, accusing them of corruption in his blog posts. Some of his posts, which contain inflammatory language and personal information about judges, have been cited by prosecutors as "true threats."

Boyne, however, argues that his posts are protected political speech under the First Amendment. “They’re trying to make an example out of me because I’m criticizing the judiciary,” he said.

Is It Free Speech or a True Threat?

The core issue in Boyne’s case is whether his blog posts, which often contain violent rhetoric, constitute a "true threat" or are protected free speech. Katz has previously voiced her opinions on this issue, writing in a January 2022 article for the Connecticut Law Tribune that Boyne’s posts have crossed the line. Katz wrote that while hate speech is protected under the First Amendment, threats of violence are not.

“There is a clear distinction between offensive speech and criminal threats,” Katz stated in the article, adding that Boyne’s blog has “gone from vile rants to actual threats of harm.”

Katz has also spoken on the issue at public forums, including a 2022 Anti-Defamation League (ADL) event where she discussed the challenges of combating hate speech. Katz explained that while offensive speech is often protected, the law must intervene when speech incites violence or poses a real threat to public officials.

“When speech becomes a threat, it’s no longer protected by the First Amendment,” Katz said during the ADL panel, emphasizing that threats against public officials should not be tolerated.

Political Speech on Trial?

Photo byRichard Luthmann / Substack

Boyne and his supporters argue that his case is about more than just his controversial blog posts—it’s about the limits of free speech in a political context. Michael Volpe, co-host of The Unknown Podcast and an investigative journalist following Boyne’s case, noted that the prosecution could have a chilling effect on other critics of the Connecticut judicial system.

“This case is about whether political speech, even if it’s harsh, can be criminalized,” Volpe said.

Luthmann, who has been covering Boyne’s case extensively, raised concerns about the potential political motivations behind the prosecution.

“If Joette Katz is involved, it’s a sign that this case isn’t just about criminal threats—it’s about silencing a vocal critic of the judiciary,” Luthmann said during a recent podcast episode.

Boyne himself believes that the prosecution is a coordinated effort to silence dissent. He claims that the state is using the charges against him as a pretext to stifle his blog, which he insists is a platform for exposing corruption in the family courts.

The ‘True Threat’ Standard

Katz, a legal expert with decades of experience, views Boyne’s posts as falling under the "true threat" standard established by the U.S. Supreme Court.

In the landmark case Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, the Court ruled that certain forms of speech, such as “fighting words” and "true threats," are not protected by the First Amendment. Katz has cited this case as a foundation for her belief that Boyne’s speech crosses the line into criminality.

“It’s not just about what’s said—it’s about the context and how the person targeted perceives it,” Katz said during the ADL panel.

Katz believes that when speech poses a real risk of violence, it can and should be curtailed to protect public officials and individuals from harm.

Boyne, however, disagrees. He contends that his speech is political in nature and does not meet the legal definition of a threat.

“They don’t like what I’m saying because I’m calling out corruption,” Boyne said.

What’s Next?

As Boyne’s case continues to unfold, the debate over free speech and judicial power intensifies. Boyne has been in pre-trial detention for over a year and claims that his defense team is pushing for a competency evaluation to delay the trial.

“This is a tactic to keep me in jail longer,” Boyne said.

While Katz has not publicly commented on Boyne’s allegations of her involvement, she has consistently advocated for legal measures to combat hate speech and threats against public officials. Whether or not Katz is directly involved in Boyne’s prosecution, her views on the limits of free speech are likely to play a key role in the legal arguments moving forward.

For now, Boyne remains defiant.

“This case is about free speech—nothing more, nothing less,” he said. “They can’t lock me up just because they don’t like what I’m saying.”

Richard Luthmann is a writer, commentator, and investigative reporter with degrees from Columbia University and the University of Miami. A transplanted New Yorker, Luthmann is a National Writers Union member and now living in Southwest Florida.

If you liked this article, please tell Newsbreak to support independent journalists by monetizing their work. Email: creators.monetization@newsbreak.com.

If you liked this article, please consider following me below or commenting. For tips or help, call 239-631-5957 or email richard.luthmann@protonmail.com.