Opinion: People should not try to use the legal system to silence critics

Dan’s Tap House co-owner Charlotte Aufdem-Brinke files criminal charges against YouTuber Shaun Porter. But weaponizing the justice system against your critics is not justice.

“Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel” is an old saying which basically states you shouldn’t pick a fight with the news media. Today that quote should probably be revised to include online media, especially YouTube.

You know, I really hate writing opinion articles. I want to stick to factual news. But, since Radio Free Hub City was mentioned in the criminal charging documents against Shaun Porter, then I don’t have much choice but to respond and set the record straight.

Recently a video was posted on Shaun Porter’s YouTube regarding criminal charges which have been filed against him by Charlotte Aufdem-Brinke, co-owner of the now-closed Dan’s Tap House. Levi Trumbull from Frederick, MD breaks down the charging document in his own video. And, while in my opinion Mr. Porter is foul-mouthed, uncivil, and often takes things a bit too far (including his sarcastic claims that I, the President of Radio Free Hub City, was involved in organizing his protest at Dan’s Tap House), he still has the First Amendment right to free speech. While I don’t agree with his methods, from what I’ve observed from afar, none of his speech has been unlawful or threatening. In fact, today’s Supreme Court decision further reinforced that unless the speech is a “true threat”, it is not unlawful.

Interestingly enough, the charging documents even go so far as to imply some sort of collaborative effort among Porter and others. However, notice that Ms. Aufdem-Brinke uses “likely involving”, meaning there is no evidence of such an effort.

It’s interesting that Ms. Aufdem-Brinke claims Porter’s video is defamatory, but yet we have not seen any civil lawsuit by Ms. Aufdem-Brinke claiming such. That’s what civil courts are for by the way, to resolve cases where people make untrue, damaging statements about another person. If the video by Mr. Porter is truly defamatory, it would be much a better usage of everyone’s time (and taxpayer dollars) if this were handled by a civil court, not a criminal one. Defamation is not a crime, but in fact a “tort” or civil wrong. The person who has been defamed can seek damages from the perpetrator, but that is for civil courts utilizing your own funding, not criminal courts utilizing taxpayer funding.

By the way, we extended the opportunity to Dan’s Tap House multiple times to conduct their own interview, even before our original interview and article were published. No response was given, until we finally received a statement from Dan Aufdem-Brinke, in lieu of an interview. We wanted to tell their side of the story, we wanted to share as much relevant information as possible about the case. With that said, at no point did I ever reach out directly outside of business channels to Dan, Charlotte, or the manager Mike Skinner, because I prefer to keep professional conduct professional, and through the proper channels. Prior to the recent closure/deletion of her Facebook account, I was in fact Facebook friends with Ms. Aufdem-Brinke, but never did I once attempt to leverage that connection to try and pressure her into conducting an interview or providing a statement to RFHC.

While we’re on the topic of Dan’s Tap House, I was very sad to see it close. I loved their food. In fact, most people don’t know this, but I was actually there behind the camera during Ryan Miner’s 2020 interview of Ms. Aufdem-Brinke and her staff during the Black Lives Matter controversy – not because I supported or disagreed with the Tap House’s stance, but because I feel all sides of the story needed to be told. I never had any problems at Dan’s, until I attempted to get a comment from the manager Mike Skinner on Shaun Porter’s 2023 protest, at which point I was treated with hostility and repeatedly instructed by one of the staff to remove myself from a public sidewalk. I don’t blame them for this, I absolutely understand they were under a lot of stress from everything going on. Hell, in the process of trying to cover this story, Mr. Porter even jokingly made claims that I was involved in creating the sign used in the protest. A statement he later clarified. Full disclosure, I did receive a tip from Mr. Porter that he would be protesting the day he made that sarcastic accusation, but in no way did I have any involvement in the planning or execution of the protest. In fact, after a brief on-camera interview with Mr. Porter (which was the first time he and I had ever met in-person), I removed myself from the area as the protest started. This entire interaction can be viewed on our YouTube channel.

Recently Ms. Aufdem-Brinke subjected herself to the public spotlight through her various public announcements regarding the lawsuit and protest against Dan’s Tap House. And while her Facebook account has now disappeared, this does not “undo” her public statements, including those she posted about Mr. Porter. As such, Mr. Porter can absolutely report on her public activities if he so desires, and even post body camera footage from a police officer visiting her home, because that footage is public record, and Mr. Porter lawfully obtained it through a Maryland Public Information Act request. Once again, do I agree with his methods? Absolutely not, hence why the link to his YouTube page was removed from our original article after he started making his own videos about the lawsuit against Dan’s Tap House. In fact, the link to his YouTube channel was originally included so that readers could judge on their own the credibility of the source. I truly wish others would have reached out to us on that article, because I know other locals had opinions on the Tap House, but none felt comfortable letting us quote them publicly, positive or negative. In hindsight, I can see why, as they might have also been accused of being part of some “collaborative effort” against Dan’s should they have said anything negative about the establishment.

To be clear, we intentionally stopped covering the Dan’s Tap House story because it had simply devolved into what amounts to an “internet fight” which we no longer felt was newsworthy. To be perfectly honest, I hated covering that story, because I hate covering stories that are negative. I don’t regret covering it, because I knew that we’d likely have the most balanced coverage, and it was a story that needed to be told. But after the initial lawsuit coverage and protest coverage, nothing newsworthy has happened regarding that story. And even when I was informed by Mr. Porter that Ms. Aufdem-Brinke had allegedly attempted to start baseless rumors about myself and other Boonsboro residents, I remained silent because of the absolute absurdity of the rumors and lack of relevance to the actual Dan’s Tap House case. However, when one side of the “internet fight” then deletes their posts, and files criminal charges against one of the people she was publicly criticizing in those posts (and trying to involve Radio Free Hub City in the process), in my opinion this is nothing short of weaponizing the justice system, and must be reported on. Weaponizing the justice system against your critics is not justice.

My initial thoughts when I watched the video were “wow, I’m glad we stopped reporting on that train-wreck.” However, this gave me pause, because in my opinion that’s exactly what the intention of Ms. Aufdem-Brinke’s criminal charges seem to be, to silence those reporting on her and her now-closed business. It was at that point I realized that we absolutely must cover this, because to not cover it due to fear of some sort of legal action against myself would allow this perversion of the justice system to continue. This really does bother me, because quite honestly I was tired of all the Dan’s Tap House drama, and really looking forward to the entire community moving on. And had Radio Free Hub City and myself not been mentioned in the charging documents, I still might have remained silent on this.

Previously, a common method of silencing opponents through the legal system was through the usage of civil suits, mostly defamation suits. These methods resulted in the creation of anti-SLAPP laws, allowing defendants in civil suits to get all proceedings paused or dismissed if the case is in fact completely baseless and intended to simply silence critics. However, since anti-SLAPP laws typically do not apply to criminal proceedings, it’s now becoming more common to simply file harassment or stalking charges against critics based upon very weak evidence. These charges don’t even have to stick, but can often be sufficient to stop critics from continuing their criticism of public figures due to lack of resources to defend themselves in court.

The saddest part of this all, is that I have never had any ill-will towards Ms. Aufdem-Brinke, and after meeting her at Dan’s Tap House, used to consider her a friend. It saddens me to think that she believes I’d be involved in any such “collaborative effort”. I still have no ill-will towards anyone from Dan’s actually, and I’d happily sit down and have a drink with any of them (even you Mike Skinner). I do not regret helping interview Ms. Aufdem-Brinke during the 2020 Black Lives Matter controversy, and I do not regret our 2023 coverage of Neal Glessner’s civil rights lawsuit. I have, and always will, work to find the truth in local matters, and help that truth come to light. You will never find my own opinion being passed as “news” without strict notification that it is in fact my opinion. All too often, today’s news media passes opinions as “news”, and this is in my opinion dishonest journalism.

The world needs more Walter Cronkite, and less Cooper Anderson and Alex Jones. I really want to report on more positive events in this area, not the negative ones. Please, can everyone just get along so I can report more on stuff like the amazing Fort Ritchie fireworks that we covered this past weekend? That’s the kind of stuff I love covering. And for crying out loud, Dan’s Tap House is closed. Can we PLEASE just move on from it, for all parties involved, mentioned, or formerly employed?

As Walter Cronkite would say, “and that’s the way it is.”

Opinion article by Ken Buckler, President of RFHC. All opinions are his own, and do not reflect those of our sponsors. Stay tuned for our legal defense GoFundMe, if someone decides to make a frivolous claim that this opinion article is somehow harassment.