BREAKING: Paul Boyne Guilty on ALL COUNTS

Stalking verdict sparks constitutional free-speech debate.

Paul Boyne Guilty: Connecticut jury finds journalist Paul Boyne guilty on all counts in stalking case tied to blog posts criticizing judges.

LUTHMANN NOTE: The Paul Boyne verdict will reverberate far beyond Connecticut. Prosecutors convinced a jury that a series of blog posts criticizing judges amounted to criminal stalking. That theory turns harsh speech into a crime when officials say they felt fear. The Supreme Court in Counterman v. Colorado warned courts to protect even ugly speech unless prosecutors prove a true threat. Boyne’s appeal will test whether that constitutional line was crossed. If the courts uphold this conviction, every journalist, blogger, and citizen who publicly criticizes powerful officials should take notice. The next person accused of “stalking” could simply be someone who wrote something the government didn’t like. View the coverage on TheFamilyCourtCircus.com.

Richard Luthmann

By Richard Luthmann

NEW HAVEN, CT — A Connecticut jury has returned guilty verdicts on all counts against journalist and blogger Paul Boyne, concluding a controversial trial that has drawn national attention for its implications on free speech and online commentary.

Boyne was convicted on multiple counts of first-degree stalking and electronic stalking tied to a series of inflammatory blog posts targeting Connecticut judges. Prosecutors argued that Boyne’s repeated online publications constituted a “course of conduct” designed to intimidate and terrorize the judges, placing them in fear for their safety.

The defense maintained that the case was fundamentally about protected speech, arguing that Boyne’s posts — though offensive and hyperbolic — were political commentary and criticism of the judiciary, not “true threats” under the First Amendment.

The verdict follows days of intense closing arguments and a lengthy 145-page jury instruction delivered by Judge Peter Brown, who directed jurors to determine whether Boyne’s posts constituted true threats and criminal stalking conduct.

Boyne asked his legal team to immediately pursue post-trial motions, including a Motion for Judgment of Acquittal under Connecticut Practice Book § 42-40, arguing the State failed to prove a true threat under the constitutional standard clarified in Counterman v. Colorado (2023).

Supporters of Boyne say the verdict raises alarming questions about whether journalistic speech and harsh criticism of public officials can now be prosecuted as stalking.

Sentencing has not yet been scheduled.

This is a developing story and will be updated as additional details emerge about the verdict, potential appeals, and sentencing.

---