Raphael Haim Golb

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
Steven Avery
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by Steven Avery » Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:39 pm

I don't remember the posts on the forums being salacious at all, granted it was about 15 years ago. I remember a bit of confusion "where did that fellow come from?". "Who is that masked man?". Of course, even back then moderators had tools to do things like putting new posters on moderation, that pretty much solves the problem of sock-puppetry in a flash.

Similarly there was no indication in any of the trial and the accusations afaik of any of the posts being salacious. They surely would have brought that up time and again if the posts had that element. Most of the posts were trying to give support for Raphael's position in the debate, so they would not want to downgrade his own position.

If you actually find even one reference at all to salacious content re: the efforts of Raphael Gold, please share the specifics.

If not, we should not mix that in with this thread.

Thanks!

Steven

User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 2370
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by DCHindley » Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:10 pm

Steven Avery wrote:
Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:39 pm
I don't remember the posts on the forums being salacious at all, granted it was about 15 years ago. I remember a bit of confusion "where did that fellow come from?". "Who is that masked man?". Of course, even back then moderators had tools to do things like putting new posters on moderation, that pretty much solves the problem of sock-puppetry in a flash.

Similarly there was no indication in any of the trial and the accusations afaik of any of the posts being salacious. They surely would have brought that up time and again if the posts had that element. Most of the posts were trying to give support for Raphael's position in the debate, so they would not want to downgrade his own position.

If you actually find even one reference at all to salacious content re: the efforts of Raphael Gold, please share the specifics.

If not, we should not mix that in with this thread.
It's been a good while. In the case of Eisenman I seem to remember him saying the e-mail was received, as if a private communication from E to a Dean at the institution where E is employed in California USA. I have seen, but can no longer find, a purported series of discussion board posts in which a respected academic tells all sorts of wild stories about Morton Smith (disgusting homo) AND John Allegro (disgusting drug addict) but I am not so sure anymore in what context this series of posts were found. I could not tell from the url, it was just parked in a random subdirectory. It may be real, or it may be fake. Some of it I saved in files I long forgot the names of. Others were never properly archived (I am not a trained academic). My e-mail archives are on long idled desktops or laptops, most of which probably wouldn't work anymore or require a bit more technical know-how to access (video screens are not working, or hard drives which live on rescued from long-dead computers, etc.) than I possess.

Now with Raphel Golb we are in a better position, as a lot of the evidence used in his trial has been posted online in depositions, etc., that are public record. I remember that there was a lengthy exchange between me and a fellow named "anonymous" who strongly defended Raphael Golb. I am pretty sure it was actually him posting in accordance with the restrictions imposed upon him by the presiding judge while the trial proceeded. There's got to be something to find in the archives. You had earlier expressed the opinion that IIDB and FRDB posts are beyond retrieval, but not so. Peter Kirby has a search engine that can search almost all posts made on those boards, plus this one. Pretty slick!

However, I am not especially driven to invest the emotional bandwidth needed to bring them up. Sorry.

DCH

Steven Avery
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by Steven Avery » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:07 pm

Well there is an FRBD archive online (bcharchive.org) and freeratio.org is gone, and I did not realize that IIDB was still accessible by anybody.

Again, I want to emphasize that in your post nothing salacious connects at all to Raphael Golb. You reference other controversies with other people on other topics.

And any "anonymous" sock-puppet stuff was probably before the trial conviction, and I have seen zero indication that Golb has violated any court limitations.

======

Raphael looked at this site, he is going to pass for now, and appreciated the defense. He recommends Arthur S. Hayes (the article I referenced earlier, also a book. Sympathy for the Cyberbully: How the Crusade to Censor Hostile and Offensive Online Speech Abuses Freedom of Expression.) I am not giving it a whole-hearted recommendation, but definitely yes in regards to this case.

There were 21 patently unconstitutional charges that were prosecuted and then overturned, this involved five different individuals. In a sense, the reason for those prosecutions was to give a little cover for the Schiffman charges. The root of the controversy, the Avi Katzman Israeli charges of plagiarism against Schiffman in Haaretz, do not get any mention by the judges. By throwing a mountain of ludicrous felony charges, the real heart of the issues get obscured and it looks like a favor to Golb when the absurd charges get tossed.

======

In 1993, Avi Katzman, an Israeli journalist, published an interview in Haaretz in which he pushed Schiffman on the similarities between his work and Golb’s previous writings.

“But you also, in different articles that you published, have not hesitated to appropriate portions of Golb’s theory without acknowledging as much, and without giving him appropriate credit,” Katzman asserted.

“This isn’t the issue,” Schiffman responded. “There’s no innovation in Golb’s theory. … Golb can say what he wants. The idea that we’re not dealing with a sect is self-evident. Does he think that he wrote the Bible?”
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-an ... o-to-court

======

The facts were twisted, the evidence was ignored, the fix was in. They could throw out all sorts of accusations and aspersions en passant, but the issues themselves could never get a hearing. A civil case was appropriate, but probably would have been tossed out of court quickly, because there were no damages and Golb could use truth as a defense and make a reasonable case.

Steven

StephenGoranson
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by StephenGoranson » Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:46 am

"...tons of felony counts...."--?
"...multi-felony prosecution...."--?
"...a mountain of ludicrous felony charges...."--?

Meaning: two?

Steven Avery
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by Steven Avery » Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:45 am

Thanks for the correction, Stephen, to my late-night posting. The large numbers should have been to the approximately 50 counts of various misdemeanors.

Generally, nobody was hurt, a little sock-puppetry in action, stuff that was easily handled on forums. You and I were on one forum, and I liked your posts at the time as some of the best. I remember that you would support Jodi Magness view of the DSS. (For me, either side could be 'right' or half-right on this and it is irrelevant to the core issues of malicious and unnecessary prosecution.) Maybe you felt stung (I remember the posts from newbies were mildly frustrating and the mods had not instituted proper moderation rules) and were peripherally involved in the case?

With fifty counts, It became a mega-prosecution. Plus any felony charge is ultra-serious. His livelihood was taken away when they actually, absurdly, got a felony conviction. What a travesty! (Not sure if it comes back 10 years later if the law is declared unconsitutional.)

One of the purposes of the malicious prosecution was to use as leverage for a plea bargain, a mediocre offer, and Raphael quite properly said no, nothing he did was really the famous "criminal intent" which anyone can see by the wording of the law.

And I would say that nobody was hurt by the Schiffman escapade, although I could see the library (and conceivably a similar communication with Schiffman and Norman Golb) revoking his privileges for a year and asking for a public written and/or oral apology as being some sort of even-steven proper result. (Under the Hillary-Comey Doctrine, if you really, really do not intend tangible damage, your actions are fine.)

By making it a fifty-count indictment, they ensured that legal time and fees would be large, and they have could have throw away charges, or maybe have some left over after for many the law was declared unconstitutional. And still have some residue to try to use for jail.

The law can now be used more easily against oddball ideas expressed on the internet and against satire. When people received the "Schiffman" gmail email, do you think they really could not find out chick-chuck, 1-2-3 that it was not really Lawrence? Please. The purpose of the email was to get people to think! When Tina Fey parodies Sarah Palin, somebody watching might think it is actually Palin. So should she go to jail for criminal impersonation? Should she even have to check with lawyers as to whether there might be a prosecution case in some local area?

This never should have been in the legal system.

One of the main pushers of the malicious prosecution is now head of SBL, Robert Cargill. If you read his blog in the early years, it was clear that he was hoping for a result that would be a $ pot at the end of the rainbow if he could sue Norman Golb. While Cargill got along well in a counter-culture way with Golb's lawyer (good 'ol Ron Kuby) I lost all respect for him after reading his blogs on this topic. (Some of our stuff should still be online.)

Steven

User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 2370
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by DCHindley » Tue Nov 21, 2017 6:36 am

Steven Avery wrote:
Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:39 pm
I don't remember the posts on the forums being salacious at all, granted it was about 15 years ago. I remember a bit of confusion "where did that fellow come from?". "Who is that masked man?". Of course, even back then moderators had tools to do things like putting new posters on moderation, that pretty much solves the problem of sock-puppetry in a flash.

Similarly there was no indication in any of the trial and the accusations afaik of any of the posts being salacious. They surely would have brought that up time and again if the posts had that element. Most of the posts were trying to give support for Raphael's position in the debate, so they would not want to downgrade his own position.

If you actually find even one reference at all to salacious content re: the efforts of Raphael Gold, please share the specifics.

If not, we should not mix that in with this thread.

Thanks!

Steven
The first section labeled "Search the main collection" covers IIDB & FRDB posts, which are archived in their entirety.

Gotta run!

User avatar
John T
Posts: 1008
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by John T » Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:45 am

Steven Avery wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:45 am

This never should have been in the legal system.

One of the main pushers of the malicious prosecution is now head of SBL, Robert Cargill. If you read his blog in the early years, it was clear that he was hoping for a result that would be a $ pot at the end of the rainbow if he could sue Norman Golb. While Cargill got along well in a counter-culture way with Golb's lawyer (good 'ol Ron Kuby) I lost all respect for him after reading his blogs on this topic. (Some of our stuff should still be online.)

Steven
Thanks for the links. Very informative.
However, I think if the SCOTUS gets the case they will see it not as a harmless form of cyber-bullying.

Timing could not be worse for Raphael with the nation in outrage over the liberal media using fake-news to destroy politicians.

Anyway, one of my questions for Norman would be: Isn't it possible that the caves could have been an independent (used book) library filled with worn out and/or sub-standard copies of scrolls?

John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

User avatar
John T
Posts: 1008
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by John T » Fri Mar 09, 2018 10:15 am

All the charges against Norman Raphael Golb were dropped except one 17 and SCOUS refused to hear it * {his appeal.}.
The conviction stands.

"It is not often the Supreme Court of the United States is involved in a case concerning the Dead Sea Scrolls. And, it appears that will remain the case. On February 20, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States chose not to hear the case of Raphael Golb, the son of University of Chicago professor Norman Golb....The Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court heard his case in 2013 and upheld 29 of his 30 charges. After another appeal, his case went to the New York Court of Appeals in 2014. This court dropped 10 charges, but reaffirmed the remainder and resentenced him to two months in prison and three years of probation. In 2015, Golb filed a writ of habeas corpus in the district court, which resulted in two more charges being dropped....

"...Having been unsuccessful in overturning all of the convictions against him, he appealed once more—this time to the Supreme Court of the United States. Last week, the Supreme Court declined to hear Golb’s case. Barring some further creative appeal on Golb’s part, his eight-year appeal process appears to have come to an end."
...BAR

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/aut ... ety-staff/

I'm not sure if or when he will serve two months in prison.

John T
Last edited by John T on Thu Apr 19, 2018 2:26 pm, edited 5 times in total.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

StephenGoranson
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by StephenGoranson » Sat Mar 10, 2018 2:27 am

29 -10 = 19.
19 - 2 = 17.

User avatar
John T
Posts: 1008
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Raphael Haim Golb

Post by John T » Sat Mar 10, 2018 3:39 am

StephenGoranson wrote:
Sat Mar 10, 2018 2:27 am
29 -10 = 19.
19 - 2 = 17.
Changes made.
Thanks for checking the math. :cheers:
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

Post Reply