FreeAnons was founded by people with a mission to support those incarcerated by the State for crimes related to freedom of information and activism. One of those people was Jeremy Hammond. Another person was Nancy Norelli, a criminal defense attorney from Florida. For over 5 years Nancy acted as probono legal counsel for FreeAnons, which was her intent from day one.
As the amount of work grew, so did the ranks. Enter Sue Crabtree and Pamela Drew. It seemingly didn't take long for things to change. A public dispute over ethics and website hosting with a Board member resigning stating a lack of transparency to the community. In the same time period, a question about pledging support for activists who were then abandoned became public, resulting in statements pulling back the curtains somewhat. Members of the community arrested for computer crimes in projects endorsed and promoted by FreeAnons were given lip service and forgotten, leaving it to them to fight the wall of FA and their supporters. All of these issues were met with character assassination, innuendo, wholesale denial of verifiable facts and subtle threats from members of the FreeAnons inner circle.
An inner circle that Nancy was no longer allowed into. As legal counsel, it's fairly obvious disclosure and open communication with clients is necessary. Her legal opinion was being downplayed or ignored. On July 13 this year, Nancy found she was locked out of the twitter account she started. What followed was a fable about Nancy betraying her founding partner Jeremy Hammond, along with rumors used in every other incident.
There is no question the mission of FreeAnons has changed over the years. Brand has become the mission. There is nothing FreeAnons does that is exclusive or particularily well executed, beyond rabble rousing and retweeting. Do they deserve the community's trust and support?
Nancy Norelli joins us to examine and explain today's FA