Rob AriasA local Emeryville blogger who has walked a fine line between civil and criminal harassment for years, was finally brought before a judge in a court of law on Thursday.
A temporary restraining order (TRO) was granted against Emeryville Tattler Blogger Brian Donahue on behalf of two City of Emeryville employees back on March 7. The city was looking to make this order “permanent” (a “PRO”) by proving to a judge that Donahue’s behavior was an ongoing threat to the safety and wellbeing of Emeryville City Attorney John Kennedy and Community Services Assistant Bryan Andrews.
Donahue has refuted these allegations and framed the city’s efforts as an attempt to silence his criticisms and an attack on the first amendment rights.
Call to Order & Swearing In
Donahue finally “had his day in court” at the Wiley W. Manuel Courthouse in Oakland on September 25. The original court date had been delayed three times since the originally scheduled May 22 date.
Alameda County Superior Court Judge Brian Caruth presided over the hearing. Kennedy and Andrews were represented by the Renne Public Law Group. Also on the Petitioner’s side was Andrews’ manager, Community Services Director Rebecca Sermeno.
Donahue, representing himself and toting a large stack of cardboard mounted posters, was joined by political ally and Emeryville City Councilmember Kalimah Priforce who was the only member of the public in attendance.
“I support him the same way I support anyone in Emeryville who faces unfair targeting from city government,” Priforce provided clarifying his reasons for his show of support for Donahue. “Showing up for Brian is no different than showing up for you or any other resident when City Hall is acting in bad faith. That’s what being a public advocate requires.”
“Out of Compliance” For Not Surrendering Firearms
Judge Caruth reminded the two parties of the protocols of the hearing and the expected resolution. “We’d like this to come to a conclusion as quickly as possible,” Caruth stated advising Donahue that any new evidence submitted would require proof of relevance.
The hearing quickly revealed that Donahue had not been in compliance with the TRO and that he had held on to at least one rifle that he was in possession of.
The TRO clearly states on page 3 of the filed document that the restrained person “cannot own, possess, have, buy or try to buy, receive or try to receive, or in any other way get any prohibited items listed.” The listed items include Firearms, Firearm parts or Ammunition.
Donahue publicly admitted on his own blog that he was in possession of two rifles in the comments of a 2016 story involving the use of AR-15 rifles by the EPD.
Donahue claimed to be naive to the this requirement despite the unambiguous language. He ultimately surrendered his Winchester rifle on July 8, four months after the TRO was approved and nearly two months after we published our May 18 story detailing his admitted possession.
Summary of Arguments, Petitioner’s Case
A summary of arguments was provided to the courtroom including a recap of the timeline of events and incidents that had led up to the city’s TRO request. This also included the efforts by the city to avoid this process through a communication plan, and Donahue’s disregard of these attempts.
Counsel also attempted to explain that the TRO was structured around allowing Donahue to continue his advocacy and not interfere with his first amendment rights.
Most workplaces in California including local governments are required to ensure the safety of their employees through the California Workplace Violence Prevention Act. Neglecting or dismissing potential threats can put them at legal risk. The city put forth considerable financial resources to pursue this action against Donahue but likely a fraction of the amount they’d have to dole out if things escalated with him resulting in injury or worse to any employees.
Respondent’s Case
Donahue persistently attempted to discredit the testimony of the city’s counsel arguing that the employees never expressed fear for their lives or demonstrated the effect of trauma.
Donahue cited the 1999 People vs. Ewing case ruling where a stalking conviction was overturned by an appeals court as the victim failed to prove that they were subject to “substantial emotional distress.” Donahue attempted to argue that Kennedy and Andrews had not demonstrated they they were traumatized from the experience or fearful of him because neither had sought counseling in the wake of the incident.
Kennedy attested that he began carrying pepper spray with him after Donahue began waiting for him after city meetings and physically confronting him and threatening to “dox” personal information about him.
Donahue persistently argued that he was performing his journalistic duties by confronting Kennedy and Sermeno and that extracting this information ‘was of interest to his readers.’ Donahue argued that his PRA requests were being ignored and thus the only way to obtain the information he needed was by physically confronting and recording them.
Among Donahue’s cardboard mounted props were case law excerpts and enlarged prints of captions of critical stories he had written of Kennedy and Sermeno. Donahue attempted to argue that the actions being taken against him were retaliation for these online criticisms.
These employees denied that anything that he wrote irked them but that his personal confrontations while filming them and using threatening language is what crossed the line.
Judge Ruling: “A Consistent Pattern”
A lot was at stake for employees of the city and others who have been been on the receiving end of Donahue’s torment. Denial of the restraining order would surely embolden him to act even more belligerently and with impunity.
Despite Donahue’s long track record of harassment, the hearing was not exactly a slam dunk. Recent attempts at restraining orders against activists have been denied including by two former City of Oakland Staffers against well known activist and recall organizer Seneca Scott.
Councilmember Kalimah Priforce recently attempted to obtain a restraining order against Planning Commissioner and former City Council candidate Samuel Gould which was also denied. Both these hearings were presided over by Judge Maria Morga.
“Mr. Donahue routinely puts himself at the center of the story. It’s not clear that his information is useful to the public.”
Alameda County Superior Court Judge Brian Caruth
Judge Caruth noted his observation of a “consistent pattern” of Donahue “routinely put himself at the center of the story,” and questioned the usefulness of his information to the public. “I do not see how this meets the goals of journalism,” he stated seemingly aware of Donahue’s “Gotcha Journalism” methods.
Caruth proclaimed that the burden of proof had been met and he therefore granted a three year renewable long-term restraining order.
Donahue Now On “Short Leash”?
Per the tailored terms of the request, Donahue will still be allowed to attend public meetings (albeit while maintaining a 5 yard distance from Kennedy and Andrews), file Public Record Act requests and email staff.
Donahue might now consider himself on a “short leash” as subsequent further action against him would be easier to prove now that a track record has been established within the court system.
For over a decade he has challenged those on the receiving end of his bullying to “have him arrested” and prove that he is the scofflaw they say he is. Now, they have an established ruling in an Alameda County Superior Court.
Should Donahue violate the restraining order, he could be subject to arrest, fines, and up to a year in jail.
Great coverage of this case! Donahue is a bully and a liar who threatens anybody who doesn’t agree with him. It looks like he was caught in one of his lies by bragging about his guns.
Imagine how city staff felt having Councilmember Priforce defending the person stalking and threatening them. Talk about a terrible work environment.
Finally, some accountability. He went from annoying blowhard to credible threat a long time ago.
So the city got its revenge against Brian Donahue for that video takedown of John Bauters. If a judge denied those TROS on the basis of free speech and the other didn’t, he should definitely appeal.
An appeal can be filed within 60 days but it must be based on legal grounds (improper admission of evidence, insufficient proof, denial of due process, etc.).
For the appeal, the burden of proof has to be further established. Evans v. Evans and Thomas v. Quintero shows that California appeals courts will overturn restraining orders where protected speech/activism was swept in.
“Carrying pepper spray” or “feeling uncomfortable” is not necessarily “substantial emotional distress” under § 527.6 caselaw (Hansen v. Volkov, People v. Ewing). The reporter should appeal. Looks like he had no legal representation, and is probably why he lost.
So is he an activist or a reporter? Because he really can’t be both.
The public advocate stuff makes complete sense. I can see wby Councilmember Kalimah Priforce was there for Brian Donahue. He’s stayed true to his campaign promises of being for us. I think that’s commendable. If Emeryville city staff have a problem with that, they should look up what a public advocate is especially when it is our tax dollars paying for their salaries.
Call me crazy but I’d rather be fighting bullies than advocating on behalf of them.
I think everyone sees through Priforce’s justification for this. Donahue is his attack dog and he needs him to go after his political enemies by writing outlandish sh*t about them.
This has clearly backfired and now he is forever linked to the most hated person in the city.
It’s disgusting that Priforce would defend Donahue instead of protecting the city’s employees, but maybe not so surprising since Priforce lies constantly at council meetings and has Donahue write articles praising him.
You can always tell when Planning Commissioner Sam Gould rears his head in the comments, because suddenly every article that even briefly mentions Councilmember Kalimah Priforce gets twisted back to his personal grudge. The irony is that this is the same City of Emeryville that wasted taxpayer dollars mailing smear letters against an elected councilmember, as if we as residents were too gullible to see through it.
Kalimah won his seat fair and square – with our votes. And unlike the political games being played, he’s stands with us against city hall whenever it matters. If you can’t accept that reality, you’re not ready to represent anyone in this city.
Psychopathic narcissists like this guy create a chilling effect on anyone who may want to work in city efforts. I’m glad the order was extended, but the amount of effort it’s taking to stop this one unhinged dude (and the insanity of a sitting council member standing up for such nonsense) is especially disheartening.
Emeryville resident Corry Frydlewicz – I don’t respond to anonymous comments, but since this isn’t one, and you’ve made it clear you want to run for office, it’s obvious why I’ve become your preferred target.
First: unless you’re a licensed clinical psychologist, whimsically calling anyone a “psychopathic narcissist,” “unhinged,” or accusing me of “insanity” in the same breath is troubling and reveals what someone mentioned in another comments section – the same ole political drama Emeryville has dealt with during the John Bauters era would not change should you be elected by leaning on performative antics and then feigning victimhood whenever the people fight back.
In fact, you seem eager to assimilate into it, leaning on that drama as a way to signal your alignment with the very status quo you’re hoping will accept you, based on your “pick-me” online persona. Three pathologizing labels in two sentences reveal far more about you than me. That says more about your politics than anything about mine.
History is full of governments weaponizing this exact rhetoric to silence dissent – suffragists dismissed as “hysterical,” civil rights leaders branded “agitators,” queer and trans people pathologized as “mentally ill.” If you choose to build on that legacy, that is you, not me.
Second, about Brian Donahue. Yes, he’s a cis White man – and maybe you believe that because he doesn’t fit into identity politics he should be dehumanized. You’ve already gone down that road in your comment. I beg to differ. That is not the oath of office I took when the people of Emeryville selected me to represent them.
He is also a resident of this city and a member of the press who has been reporting on government misbehavior long before I called Emeryville home. And I say this clearly: I have been one of his sharpest critics. I do not excuse his tactics. He could have gone about things differently, like filing an anti-SLAPP suit, or filing a restraining order against the person who assaulted him, but I’m not here to police him.
I understand the history of Emeryville city officials taking steps to suppress and obstruct the reporting of the E’ville Eye and Emeryville Tattler. My duty is to ensure that the city deals with all residents fairly. That includes providing oversight to ensure that Donahue, like everyone, was treated fairly during the hearing – a hearing that exposed inconsistent statements from the City, included the judge’s criticisms of the “communication plan,” and made clear that Donahue had not interacted with or made contact with one of the petitioners in over a year before the filing of the temporary restraining order. But I’ll leave the facts to the attorneys to ascertain.
What makes this imbalance worse is where the City chooses to direct its energy: instead of addressing the actions of forces in our city that have done real harm, the City has focused more on silencing critics like Brian Donahue. Every dollar spent by the City of Emeryville on this case could have gone toward alleviating the increasing rent burdens of residents, or toward long-overdue renovations of our public spaces and facilities.
The contrast is stark – when residents raise alarms about misconduct or environmental hazards, enforcement is slow, defensive, and often dismissive. But when dissenters challenge City Hall, the full weight of legal resources comes down on them.
And here’s the principle I live by: when any constituent asks me to show up for them against the full weight of city government, I do it. Every time. To mischaracterize that as “standing up for nonsense” doesn’t just insult me – it reveals a willingness to jump to conclusions and ignore the people of Emeryville you claim you want to represent.
Resident Frydlewicz, it’s obvious your politics are not mine. I don’t yet know exactly what yours are, as you seem to be more reactionary than visionary. So far, they don’t sound rooted in the best interests of the public.
Choosing staff over the people isn’t leadership – it’s bureaucratic capture and deference to the professional-managerial class. That class doesn’t own capital directly, but it enforces the rules, shields City Hall from accountability, and manages the public on behalf of those who do. History has shown where that mindset leads: officials defending institutions instead of residents, from COINTELPRO’s surveillance of activists to trans communities dismissed as “unstable” to deny rights, to immigrant families treated as threats instead of neighbors. It’s giving self-interest over public advocacy.
If you have a genuine issue you’d like to discuss with me rather than hurl insults at me in the comments sections of a news article, I’d suggest you take it offline and spare readers further theatrics. Give me a call and I’d be happy to arrange a sit-down with you during my office hours as a Councilmember. But as a private citizen, you would have to demonstrate a lot more community work and progressive activism before expecting to engage with me personally.
You don’t have to like me, and you don’t have to agree with me. But don’t mischaracterize public advocacy as “nonsense.” The political, cultural, and historical traditions I belong to – from the Haitian Revolution to the Underground Railroad to the Civil Rights era – taught me that being a civic leader means showing up for people, especially my constituents – even unpopular ones – is the job. If you can’t grasp that, then in my opinion, you aren’t fit to occupy the people’s seat.
The hypocrisy is kinda impressive. Haven’t you literally tried to silence critics by calling them unhinged white males? Corry said nothing about identity and your response proves that you care more about defending one abuser than the fact city staff doesn’t feel safe coming to work. They also never called you insane, they said the fact that you defended a gun owning stalker that made threats against your staff is insane, which it absolutely is.
I like how Priforce portrays Brian as the victim here as if the poor 300 pound man screaming and getting in the face of women and workers that you claim you care so much about is THEIR fault for not complying with him.
You know should cut ties with him but you won’t and we all know why. Because you think you have him on a leash but don’t be surprised when he turns around and bites you.
Unfairly targeted? Dude, get a f’n clue.
The young man has made himself very clear. It’s these kind of politics that I am sick of.. I’ve lived in Emeryville for over thirty years and I thought the time of Nora and Ken were bad and that John would be a nice fella, turns he cared more about streets than people, but for the first time in a long time I’m seeing a man of color stand up for himself and the citizenry and all you people do is try to tear him down. He may not answer anonymous comments but I do and I say go away because you’re not helping the people of Emeryville. He is.
It was pretty uncomfortable watching the staff members and majority of city council members and lately commission members get targeted and bullied in person and online. Glad this judge granted a permanent restraining order. This has been decades too long.
Blaming Priforce for Donahue is like blaming the “woke-left” for Charlie Kirk’s death. If your argument was strong, you wouldn’t need to invent shit by turning it into another excuse to go after Priforce.
Weak.
that was long! but an educated and well articualed response. child ignore these people. they are nowhere on your level. the Lord is with you so you keep on doing the good work. everyone sees it. let them that are filled with hate sow the seeds to their demise. romans 12:19
Sam, when did he ever call you unhinged?
The Seneca Scott tie-in is very appropriate here.
Brian is Kalimah’s Seneca. And like Loren Taylor, will never denounce him because he needs him to do his dirty work. Loren’s ties to Senecca were a liabity for him when he ran for Mayor and will likely be Kalimah’s undoing as well.
I strictly recall Nikki Bas relying on Donahue’s reporting and still won against John Bauters. You are desperate Sam Gould. Every time another comment appears that makes this about Kalimah – we know it’s you. You have no idea how much support and love Kalimah Priforce has with us.
Thanks for making my point for me Kalimah 😉
They can’t help but make it about him. They’re obsessed with Priforce.
Brian Donahue is not Kalimah Priforce’s Seneca Scott. It’s not the right comparison. Seneca Scott has been very vocal about his opposition to Priforce, said he had dirt on Priforce.
My wish is to keep him far away from anyone working for the City in a volunteer or staff capacity at any public event or council/committee meeting. I have myself felt that an EPD presence of multiple officers is mandatory to protect people from this kind of relentless harassment.
thats senecas style he likes to make up claims to have dirt on people because hes so rotten and trying to stay relevant hes a sore loser with a chip on his shoulder
I’ve been an E’ville Eye reader for years and Brian Donahue is a flawed man. I’ll just leave it at thatm, but reading these comments, do stories that mention council member Kalimah Priforce get the most attention? the comments just explode whenever he’s mentioned even for a brief moment. I google a bit about hhim and he indeed is a exciting star and I really loved his above response. It helped me to understand what a public advocate is. I’ll see him at the Powell street event and tell him personally how much I admire him for standing up for himself and not selling me out as supporter. I would have been disappointed in him if he had.
It’s hard to parse all these anonymous comments and discern which are sock puppet and which are authentic but as I see it, The E’ville Eye is exposing a bully while Priforce seams to be coddling and enabling him and expecting praise for it.
‘nuf said!
How Donahue behaved toward small business owners even years ago and before Priforce lived in Emeryville has been well documented and experienced by residents.
This tells us everything we need know about Priforce supporters. When Priforce supporters see him as public advocate and “exciting star” for public advocating for a man harassing city employees and Emeryville residents so bad a judge has granted a permanent restraining order.
They want you to change Kalimah. Don’t. Hold on brother.
These two are a case study for “toxic compatibility.” Toxic people tend to attract other toxic people. They are toxic in different ways but they validate and compliment each other.
Nextdoor also finally shut him down. Took them long enough. Have to wonder if Priforce was protecting and feeding info to Donahue since Priforce is on the Nextdoor reviews team and could vote and probably see all the identities and reports of people reporting Donahue. Nextdoor should terminate Priforce’s review capability. It’s a major conflict of power interest.