[B]ENNINGTON — Kevin Hoyt’s request for a stalking relief order against the husband of Rep. Kiah Morris over allegedly inflammatory Facebook posts was rejected Thursday after a hearing in Bennington Superior Court Civil Division.
Hoyt alleged that James Lawton had incited people against him through Facebook posts that led to him being considered by some a racist and a neo-Nazi. That, in turn, apparently led to death threat notes being left where he lives and prompted him to file a report with the Bennington Police Department on Aug. 20, Hoyt said.
Hoyt said the comments were posted in recent months after he challenged Morris, who is African-American, on social media over her stands on gun control issues, and he denied there was any racial or white supremacist component to his comments.
“I’ve lived for 48 years in Bennington, Vermont, and I have never been called a Nazi, I’ve never been called a racist,” Hoyt said.
Hoyt is a gun rights advocate and a Republican candidate for the Vermont House, running for office in the Bennington 2-1 district. Morris is one of two representatives in the Bennington 2-2 district.
Lawton, who friends have said is expected to have major surgery next week, did not attend the hearing. His attorney told the court he was receiving medical attention in the hospital.
After reviewing submissions submitted by Hoyt, Judge David Barra determined that the copies of Facebook screenshots and a police report submitted to the court did not constitute the type of evidence needed under the law to support a no-stalking order.
The judge said that would require evidence Lawton had been involved in the alleged threats. There was no evidence provided that Lawton had left either death threat note reported by Hoyt, the judge said.
Hoyt said he suspected it might have been Lawton but didn’t know who left either note.
Barra said he would agree with the court’s prior rejection on similar grounds of Hoyt’s bid for an emergency no-stalking order. Hoyt had appealed that decision, leading to the hearing on Thursday afternoon.
Hoyt said that one of the notes left on his property said “Die Nazi die,” but that he threw it away. He said he later found another note after someone had apparently tried to enter his house only to be deterred by the barking of his Rotweiller dog.
Hoyt submitted that note to police Aug. 20 and provided a copy to the court. It stated in part: “The obsessive attacks against the Morris family disgust me! Your a [sic] neo Nazi and a white supremacist. We have guns to [sic], your [sic] pathetic and you will see mine when you least expect it! … YOU DO NOT DESERVE TO LIVE AND THERE IS NO PLACE FOR RACISM HERE!”
Reverse racism alleged
Citing online harassment and threats, Hoyt said Lawton had used similar harassment tactics against him and was inciting people against him.
Both the judge and attorney Robert Appel, of Burlington, representing Lawton, questioned how it could be determined with certainty whether Lawton had written the Facebook comments cited by Hoyt comparing him to neo-Nazis.
“Frankly, the court raises a reasonable question of how do we know who authored the posts … Social media can be very tricky, and it is getting more so,” Appel said.
And Appel — who is also representing Morris — noted that Hoyt is a Republican candidate for the House, and that political candidates “have less protection than the average citizen” under the law from what is said about them.
Hoyt is seeking one of two seats in the 2-1 district, facing two Democratic candidates in the Nov. 6 election.
Since 2014, Morris has been one of two representatives from the Bennington 2-2 district, along with Rep. Mary Morrissey, a Republican.
Morris has said she’ll complete her term but ended her campaign in time to allow the local Democratic committee to choose a replacement for the November ballot. With Morris voting, that committee chose Select Board member Jim Carroll for the ballot spot, and like Morris previously he faces no opposition, other than a write-in candidates.
Appel said following the hearing that he hadn’t expected the judge to rule in favor of Hoyt’s request because no new evidence was presented since the request for an emergency order was denied.
“He was unable to show that Mr. Lawton had anything to do with his [threat] complaints,” Appel said.
Appel added that he was concerned there could be further court filings involving his clients. “I do have some concerns that he [Hoyt] is becoming extremely litigious, especially for someone running for office,” Appel said. “I think you have to have a thicker skin.”
Appel said he was referring to three defamation suits Hoyt filed in June against Aaron Sawyer, chairman of the Bennington County Democratic Party, and two other area residents, based primarily on online comments they allegedly posted.
In all of the court actions, Hoyt is representing himself.
“I disagree with the ruling,” Hoyt said afterward. “I think Mr. Lawton is inciting others toward violence.”
He added, “I think this shows once again that racism and abuse is allowed if it is against the right minority — in this case, it’s white, Christian, straight … Everything Mr. Lawton is accusing others of, I think he is guilty of.”
Hoyt agreed, however, that “it has slowed down a little bit, since we got the police involved,” referring to online comments involving him.
He went on to challenge the validity of some of the online harassment complaints and threats from apparent white supremacists that were reported by Morris, which began during the 2016 election campaign and were renewed beginning in July. The investigation into those complaints now is in the hands of the Attorney General’s office and tech investigation personnel with the Vermont State Police.
Hoyt said he doesn’t believe his complaints were taken as seriously as those of Morris, even though he is the only one who has made public a written note threatening his life.
Asked what he would like to see as a result of his complaints, Hoyt said, “What I would really like to see is for Mr. Lawton to tell people [online] that I am not a racist.”
Eleven years ago, Hoyt was charged with lewd and lacivious conduct with a child. The charge was later dismissed.
