# Off-duty actions of public figures in general/Shirvell/Armstrong case in particular **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 29, 2010, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505 "2010-09-29T19:12:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/81 "2010-10-01T13:06:46Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Cox has reversed himself and [supended the douchebag.](http://www.detnews.com/article/20101001/METRO/10010401/1408/local) In the same article the ACLU supports Bricker’s position and Cox’s initial protection of Shirvell. Michigan’s governor tweeted (how annoying is the day politicians discovered twitter, incidentally) that she personally would already have fired Shirvell. I’m guessing she put some pressure on Cox as well as, of course, the Anderson Cooper exposure becoming a huge liability. I hope there’s a trial over this, either from Armstrong suing Shirvell or Shirvell suing for wrongful dismissal, because I think those on both sides in this thread would agree that there are some definitions that need to be hammered out and defined. ---
**Author:** ![heatmiserfl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/df705f/32.png) [@heatmiserfl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/heatmiserfl)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/82 "2010-10-01T13:11:50Z")
> [@boytyperanma](#): > > Has he demonstrated this behavior towards anyone other then Armstrong? Has he ever shown bias in a job related function? > > I don’t think it’s fair to make assumptions about what he may or may not do. Demonstrate he does show bias, then fire him. Baring that for whatever reason restrict his job functions however necessary. However if you can’t demonstrate he can’t perform his job fairly I’m not interested in any action being taken against him other then maybe taking a close look and reviewing his work due to accusation of untoward activity. > > His personal opinions outside his job are just that, and I’m not OK with restricting public sector jobs to people that live robotic un-opinionated lives. This to me is the same deal as the former prostitute art teacher thread going on. > > Prove they can’t perform the job function or live and let live. I don’t understand why people keep referring to Shirvell as some dude with a simple public sector job exercising his first amendment rights. He’s an assistant attorney general. Even if there are several of these positions, it’s an official position of the law enforcement arm of the State of Michigan. Also, he’s not just voicing his opinion about some political matter. He’s harassing this guy. He’s a public official that should not be harassing the citizens (particularly members of a vulnerable group) he’s supposed to be protecting. It’s not like a teacher who was a prostitute in the past. I think it’s more like a teacher who starts harassing one of the students in her/his school because the student is gay/black/etc. That harassment itself is a breach of his job. Can you imagine a teacher writing racist shit against one of his/her students on her blog, then going on TV to continue the crazy? ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/83 "2010-10-01T13:14:29Z")
In this case any hard-won judgement would benpretty narrow and in the end apply only to Michigan and still require legislative action. Not really worth the tome and expense. Better the legislature just amend the law, no? ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/84 "2010-10-01T13:23:51Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Cox has reversed himself and [supended the douchebag.](http://www.detnews.com/article/20101001/METRO/10010401/1408/local) If I were Armstrong I get a gun for protection, because now this thing has gone to a new level. Shirvell is very likely to blame Armstrong for his job troubles, and now he has time to stalk 24/7. Frankly, he seems to me more likely to escalate rather than back off. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/85 "2010-10-01T13:33:17Z")
> [@heatmiserfl](#): > > I don’t understand why people keep referring to Shirvell as some dude with a simple public sector job exercising his first amendment rights. He’s an assistant attorney general. Even if there are several of these positions, it’s an official position of the law enforcement arm of the State of Michigan. How is that legally relevant? > [@](#): > > Also, he’s not just voicing his opinion about some political matter. He’s harassing this guy. He’s a public official that should not be harassing the citizens (particularly members of a vulnerable group) he’s supposed to be protecting. Harassment is defined in the law. His conduct doesn’t reach that definition (so far as I am aware). > [@](#): > > It’s not like a teacher who was a prostitute in the past. I think it’s more like a teacher who starts harassing one of the students in her/his school because the student is gay/black/etc. That harassment itself is a breach of his job. Can you imagine a teacher writing racist shit against one of his/her students on her blog, then going on TV to continue the crazy? Well, that’s what his boss will have to prove at whatever hearing procedure is available for civil service employees. I don’t like his chances. And I don’t think your analysis comes from looking at the law and what it says; I think you’re simply using the word “harassment” in sort of a common-sense context. ---
**Author:** ![Jenaroph](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e8c25b/32.png) [@Jenaroph](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jenaroph)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/86 "2010-10-01T13:33:54Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > In this case any hard-won judgement would benpretty narrow and in the end apply only to Michigan and still require legislative action. Not really worth the tome and expense. Better the legislature just amend the law, no? Christ. Depending on Michigan’s legislature to accomplish anything of value is a pipe dream. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/87 "2010-10-01T13:40:06Z")
[Toobin’s first night discussion of the legal issues](http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/29/video-toobin-sounds-off-on-andrew-shirvell/) [Last night with Toobin and Jim Tierney (Columbia U. law professor)](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bemVK_4DD2M) As Bricker noted, more is coming to light that qualifies as harassment (e.g. he _has_ contacted Armstrong several times). For Armstrong’s sake I’m glad his ability to get a restraining order/civil suit/file charges is strengthened, but on a social level I almost wish there hadn’t been contact because I’d like to see the law made clearer and harassment determined legally to include non-contact harassment (which whether it legally qualifies as such or not is certainly what most would consider harassment). ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/88 "2010-10-01T13:48:02Z")
> [@Jenaroph](#): > > > [@acsenray](#): > > > > In this case any hard-won judgement would benpretty narrow and in the end apply only to Michigan and still require legislative action. Not really worth the tome and expense. Better the legislature just amend the law, no? > > Christ. Depending on Michigan’s legislature to accomplish anything of value is a pipe dream. Reminds me of the line from _1776_- [starts at 2:00](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSCFA3ynxqQ). ---
**Author:** ![Jenaroph](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e8c25b/32.png) [@Jenaroph](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jenaroph)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/89 "2010-10-01T13:58:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Harassment is defined in the law. His conduct doesn’t reach that definition (so far as I am aware). Shirvell’s conduct goes beyond the blog. [http://lezgetreal.com/2010/10/assistant-michigan-ag-shivrell-suspended-over-homophobic-cyber-harassment/](http://lezgetreal.com/2010/10/assistant-michigan-ag-shivrell-suspended-over-homophobic-cyber-harassment/) > [@](#): > > But Armstrong is seeking a personal protection order against Shirvell, who has picketed locations frequented by Armstrong, including his residence and Ann Arbor bars. A spokeswoman for campus police, also confirmed to the Detroit News, Shirvell is a subject of an ongoing investigation of “harassing or stalking” and has been banned from the U-M campus. Shirvell was read a trespass warning on Sept. 14 that bars him from setting foot on campus. [http://tdn.com/news/national/article\_e5fbda5a-7545-59c6-a847-46234eaf6b7c.html](http://tdn.com/news/national/article_e5fbda5a-7545-59c6-a847-46234eaf6b7c.html) > [@](#): > > Cox called Shirvell immature and his blog posts “distasteful,” but said he has the right to free speech. But Cox said he was troubled that the 30-year-old lawyer videotaped police breaking up a party at Armstrong’s off-campus home in Ann Arbor over Labor Day weekend. > > “Part of the video is being outside this young man’s house at 1:30 on a Sunday morning. Clearly, I wouldn’t recommend that to any state employee to be doing,” Cox told The Associated Press on Thursday. There’s also the allegation that he’d called Armstrong’s boss asking if the boss knew he (Armstrong) was a racist, but I can’t find a text version of that - it was referenced by Anderson Cooper. ---
**Author:** ![MsWhatsit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb8c5e/32.png) [@MsWhatsit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsWhatsit)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/90 "2010-10-01T14:05:35Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Cox has reversed himself and [supended the douchebag.](http://www.detnews.com/article/20101001/METRO/10010401/1408/local) The story has been [updated and corrected](http://www.detnews.com/article/20101001/METRO/10010422/1409) to indicate that Shirvell has taken leave, rather than being suspended. For what that’s worth. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/91 "2010-10-01T14:08:21Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > Michigan’s governor tweeted (how annoying is the day politicians discovered twitter, incidentally) that she personally would already have fired Shirvell. I’m guessing she put some pressure on Cox as well as, of course, the Anderson Cooper exposure becoming a huge liability. I agree that politicians shouldn’t tweet. Either make a press release or not. I can’t imagine any pressure that a lame duck governor could exert on a lame duck AG of the opposite party. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/92 "2010-10-01T14:14:01Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > > [@Sampiro](#): > > > > Michigan’s governor tweeted (how annoying is the day politicians discovered twitter, incidentally) that she personally would already have fired Shirvell. I’m guessing she put some pressure on Cox as well as, of course, the Anderson Cooper exposure becoming a huge liability. > > I agree that politicians shouldn’t tweet. Either make a press release or not. Plus neither Jesus nor Oscar Wilde could have packed any wallop into 140 characters. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/93 "2010-10-01T14:19:22Z")
But just think how much more compact and to the point the bible would be if God had to tweet it. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/94 "2010-10-01T14:23:34Z")
> [@Jenaroph](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > Harassment is defined in the law. His conduct doesn’t reach that definition (so far as I am aware). > > Shirvell’s conduct goes beyond the blog. Picketing is also a protected, First Amendment activity. > [@](#): > > “Part of the video is being outside this young man’s house at 1:30 on a Sunday morning. Clearly, I wouldn’t recommend that to any state employee to be doing,” Cox told The Associated Press on Thursday. Sure. I wouldn’t recommend it either. But that doesn’t meet the definition of “harassment” in Michigan. > [@](#): > > There’s also the allegation that he’d called Armstrong’s boss asking if the boss knew he (Armstrong) was a racist, but I can’t find a text version of that - it was referenced by Anderson Cooper. That might. But like you, I can’t find a specific cite for it. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/95 "2010-10-01T14:29:17Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > But just think how much more compact and to the point the bible would be if God had to tweet it. @Hillel said > [@](#): > > Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you. The rest is commentary. 139 characters. Maybe somehow Hillel _knew_… ---
**Author:** ![heatmiserfl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/df705f/32.png) [@heatmiserfl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/heatmiserfl)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/96 "2010-10-01T14:41:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@heatmiserfl](#): > > > > I don’t understand why people keep referring to Shirvell as some dude with a simple public sector job exercising his first amendment rights. He’s an assistant attorney general. Even if there are several of these positions, it’s an official position of the law enforcement arm of the State of Michigan. > > How is that legally relevant? > > Harassment is defined in the law. His conduct doesn’t reach that definition (so far as I am aware). > > > [@](#): > > > > It’s not like a teacher who was a prostitute in the past. I think it’s more like a teacher who starts harassing one of the students in her/his school because the student is gay/black/etc. That harassment itself is a breach of his job. Can you imagine a teacher writing racist shit against one of his/her students on her blog, then going on TV to continue the crazy? > > Well, that’s what his boss will have to prove at whatever hearing procedure is available for civil service employees. I don’t like his chances. And I don’t think your analysis comes from looking at the law and what it says; I think you’re simply using the word “harassment” in sort of a common-sense context. You’re misunderstanding my post. I’m establishing his job as an official of the state and describing grounds for which he should be fired or at least suspended/demoted. I don’t need anything legal other than the job description of a public official in law enforcement of the State of Michigan. This requires upholding duties and certain ethical standards. BTW, not all that needs to be spelled out and as you said, some things are at the discretion of his boss. OTOH, Polycarp posted the legal definition of harassment and it looks likes his behavior, when you combine online bullying with showing up at Armstrong hangouts and contacting Armstrong, could be considered harassment. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/97 "2010-10-01T14:48:10Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > > [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > > > But just think how much more compact and to the point the bible would be if God had to tweet it. > > @Hillel said > > > [@](#): > > > > Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you. The rest is commentary. > > 139 characters. Maybe somehow Hillel _knew_… Doesn’t say much for the Old Testament. I so amuse myself! I thought “Tweet the Bible” might be an interesting game, so I made a [thread in the Game Room](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=580327). ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/98 "2010-10-01T14:58:29Z")
> [@heatmiserfl](#): > > You’re misunderstanding my post. I’m establishing his job as an official of the state and describing grounds for which he should be fired or at least suspended/demoted. I don’t need anything legal other than the job description of a public official in law enforcement of the State of Michigan. This requires upholding duties and certain ethical standards. BTW, not all that needs to be spelled out and as you said, some things are at the discretion of his boss. Cite? > [@](#): > > OTOH, Polycarp posted the legal definition of harassment and it looks likes his behavior, when you combine online bullying with showing up at Armstrong hangouts and contacting Armstrong, could be considered harassment. And I responded to Polycarp’s post with a rebuttal. _People v. White_, 536 NW 2d 876 (Michigan Ct. Appeals 1995), specifically mentions picketing as a protected activity that does not violate Michigan’s harassment law, for example. Where and how did he contact Armstrong? Apart from the “he contacted Armstrong directly” claim, you can’t point to a single case where this kind of activity, in Michigan, has produced a criminal conviction. Because you can’t, because it isn’t illegal, because it can’t be, because it doesn’t fall within the reach of the law and because it’s conduct protected by the First Amendment. And this is the first I’ve seen someone say he contacted Armstrong directly, rather than simply show up to picket or protest. I hate being in the position of defending this tool. I wish this were taking place in a state that had more defined cyberbullying laws. But I can’t simply turn off the critical thinking and join the chorus of, “Yeah, what a dick! Prosecute him!” Wishing fervently that conduct was illegal does not make it so. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/99 "2010-10-01T15:05:29Z")
Sorry…didn’t see page 3. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2010, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505/100 "2010-10-01T15:20:39Z")
To make up for my inability to read page 3, here’s the narrative part of Armstrong’s application for restraining order, explaining what Shirvell did to him: > **[Shirvell%20restraining%20order.pdf](https://www.annarbor.com/Shirvell%20restraining%20order.pdf)** > > 3.34 MB There does seem to be personal contact here, and it also includes as was mentioned, the claim that Shirvell contacted Armstrong’s employer [Nancy Pelosi, with whom Armstrong had a summer internship]: > [@](#): > > Shirvell called my internship office twice, once talking to one of the staff and once speaking to my internship coordinator Tom. Shirvell asked Tom if he knew I was a racist and if I had an affiliation with the Order of Angell when he hired me. Tom assured me not to be concerned about my position with the internship at the office, and proceeded to notify internship staff to deny Shirvell’s harassing calls. I was told a few other times throughout my internship in DC that he called the office additional times. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/off-duty-actions-of-public-figures-in-general-shirvell-armstrong-case-in-particular/555505.md?page=6)