Skip to main content

Raphael Golb's Sentence, Part II

Image: Raphael Golb enters a courtroom in New York on Sept. 27, 2010

Raphael Golb, pictured here, son of Normal Golb (see yesterday's discussion of who he is) is expected to surrender to authorities on Tuesday, July 22 to begin serving his sentence.

This is despite a victory at the Court of Appeals, which discarded the felony charge against him, identity theft, and declared unconstitutional the New York statute on "aggravated harassment." I'm glad of his victories, by the way. When such offenses are on the books they render possible the criminalization of vigorous and free-wheeling debate on the sort of issues that the first amendment was, precisely, designed to protect.

That left misdemeanor charges of forgery and impersonation still standing.

Golb took part in internet debates about the Dead Sea Scrolls, one of the issues on which his father has made a reputation. Not surprisingly, Norman Golb's thesis on this point has been hotly contested, by (among others) Lawrence Schiffman, of New York University.

In the wake of the victory of the Maccabeans over the Seleucids, and the resultant new dynasty in Judea, Jews had to figure out where they stood in the new order. It was this shake-up, Schiffman stresses, that led the Essenes to head out to the desert -- and that led hem to do exactly what Norman Gold emphatically denies: to create a vast library of their discontents, the Dead Sea Scrolls. So the library in the caves isn't the consequence of any general spiriting out of texts from Jerusalem at a much later date (the era of Roman conquest). It -- or much of it -- was created roughly where it was found.

The Golb/Schiffman dispute, which is of course part of a much broader academic contretemps, become entangled with accusations of plagiarism. It seems to have been Raphael's conviction that his father had been plagiarized by the theoretic foe that led him, Raphael, to seek to pay it back by way of impersonating Schiffman. He established e-mail accounts pretending to be Schiffman and then used those accounts to send out 'admissions' of plagiarism.

Schiffman denies the plagiarism, and the impersonation seems way uncool at any rate.
What a wonderful motive is revenge!


  1. The fact is that when a law is deemed constitutionally overbroad, and a defendant is convicted at trial under the unconstitutional statute, it is not enough for an appeals court to modify the convictions based on the correct interpretation of the law. Established Supreme Court precedent has held that such defendants must receive an entirely new trial. This is the principal issue at stake here.

  2. Golb's jail sentence was stayed by an appellate judge in NYC, and he has filed an appeal of the sentence and of the judge's refusal to grant him a new trial with proper jury instructions. The appeal brief sheds light on some of the academic issues that Christopher raises, and on the palpably, if subtly, satirical nature of the criminalized emails. See the case documentation at:

    (For the current appeal brief, scroll down past the photo to the "August 25, 2014 update." Apparently, an appeal will also be filed in federal court.)


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

England as a Raft?

In a lecture delivered in 1880, William James asked rhetorically, "Would England ... be the drifting raft she is now in European affairs if a Frederic the Great had inherited her throne instead of a Victoria, and if Messrs Bentham, Mill, Cobden, and Bright had all been born in Prussia?"

Beneath that, in a collection of such lectures later published under James' direction, was placed the footnote, "The reader will remember when this was written."

The suggestion of the bit about Bentham, Mill, etc. is that the utilitarians as a school helped render England ineffective as a European power, a drifting raft.

The footnote was added in 1897. So either James is suggesting that the baleful influence of Bentham, Mill etc wore off in the meantime or that he had over-estimated it.

Let's unpack this a bit.  What was happening in the period before 1880 that made England seem a drifting raft in European affairs, to a friendly though foreign observer (to the older brother…

Cancer Breakthrough

Hopeful news in recent days about an old and dear desideratum: a cure for cancer. Or at least for a cancer, and a nasty one at that.

The news comes about because investors in GlaxoSmithKline are greedy for profits, and has already inspired a bit of deregulation to boot. 

The FDA has paved the road for a speedy review of a new BCMA drug for multiple myeloma, essentially cancer of the bone marrow. This means that the US govt has removed some of the hurdles that would otherwise (by decision of the same govt) face a company trying to proceed with these trials expeditiously. 

This has been done because the Phase I clinical trial results have been very promising. The report I've seen indicates that details of these results will be shared with the world on Dec. 11 at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology. 

The European Medicines Agency has also given priority treatment to the drug in question. 

GSK's website identifies the drug at issue as "GSK2857916," althou…

Francesco Orsi

I thought briefly that I had found a contemporary philosopher whose views on ethics and meta-ethics checked all four key boxes. An ally all down the line.

The four, as regular readers of this blog may remember, are: cognitivism, intuitionism, consequentialism, pluralism. These represent the views that, respectively: some ethical judgments constitute knowledge; one important source for this knowledge consists of quasi-sensory non-inferential primary recognitions ("intuitions"); the right is logically dependent upon the good; and there exists an irreducible plurality of good.

Francesco Orsi seemed to believe all of these propositions. Here's his website and a link to one relevant paper:

What was better: Orsi is a young man. Born in 1980. A damned child! Has no memories of the age of disco!

So I emailed him asking if I was right that he believed all of those things. His answer: three out of …