Jailed Blogger Finally Freed After Making Deal

Wednesday, April 4th, 2007 by Andy Beal

Jailed Blogger Finally Freed After Making Deal

We wanted to give you some good news on the continuing saga of jailed blogger Josh Wolf – he’s finally a free man.

According to CNET, Wolf agreed to hand over the video he had shot of an anarchist protest in San Francisco on July 8, 2005, and also answer two questions posed by prosecutors.

The questions were whether he knew the identity of the person who threw an object at the police car during the protest, and if he could identify the person that Officer Pete Shields, injured during the protest, was pursuing at the time. Wolf said he answered “no” to both. He agreed to answer the questions because “there was nothing to be given by them,” said.

While Wolf says he was treated well while incarcerated, he was touched by the experience. He plans to start a new site that allows prisoners to share letters with people in the outside world and also plans to start “a coalition aimed at preserving a free press” at the site mediafreedoms.net.

Social Media Monitoring in Just 60-Seconds. Guaranteed!

Similar Stories in: Blogging, Legal | Forward: Email This Post

Share this post

3 comments on “Jailed Blogger Finally Freed After Making Deal”

Dario Says:

April 4th, 2007 at 10:51 am

What does the fact that he’s a blogger have to do with anything? I don’t understand… was he jailed for blogging?

Keep up the good site!
Andy Beal Says:

April 4th, 2007 at 11:35 am

Dario, I believe he’s a video blogger, and shot the video for his show, but refused to hand it over to the judge.
rick gregory Says:

April 4th, 2007 at 1:46 pm

I didn’t follow this beyond seeing it mentioned here and there, but… he had video of someone assaulting another person and really nothing else? What’s the violation of press freedom to hand over that video? or at least the portion showing the assault? His two answers likewise don’t seem something worth jail time.

I’m a big believer in press freedom (and freedom in general) but this seems a touch out there. Protecting sources… yeah I get that. Protecting someone who committed an assault? Er… no, don’t get that, sorry.