Beaver County Treasurer Connie Javens / file photo by John Paul

The real life identities of six anonymous commenters on the Beaver Countian website who posted critical remarks about Treasurer Connie Javens and her adult daughter will remain confidential. A judge handed down a ruling today blocking a subpoena issued against the Beaver Countian by the two women last year, who were attempting to unmask the anonymous individuals.

Attorneys are calling the decision a major victory for journalists in Pennsylvania, saying the case could reverberate across the Commonwealth as the judge’s ruling expands legal protections for reporters — touching on several First Amendment issues for the first time.

Treasurer Connie Javens and Renee Javens Zuk filed a defamation lawsuit back in May of last year against Beaver Countian commenters aka John Q Taxpayer, thebigdigger, THE EXECUTIONER, Slicer, Courthouseconvicts and ConnieintheSlammer. As part of their lawsuit, Javens and Zuk issued a subpoena against the Beaver Countian for identifying information about the commenters so they could proceed with their litigation.

Although this publication was not a named defendant in the lawsuit, the Beaver Countian’s John Paul refused to comply with the subpoena and vowed to protect the commenters’ anonymity. John Paul subsequently invoked the Pennsylvania Journalist Shield Law — a law that protects a reporter who gathers news from being “required to disclose the source of any information procured or obtained by such person, in any legal proceeding, trial or investigation before any government unit.”

According to the Beaver Countian’s attorneys, it marked the first time in Pennsylvania that a new media reporter had attempted to invoke the Shield Law during litigation, and the first time any reporter had attempted to use the Shield to protect the identities of anonymous commenters on a news website.

During a court hearing held before Senior Erie County Judge John Bozza last November (Bozza was assigned to the case after Beaver County President Judge John D. McBride recused all local judges from hearing the matter), John Paul testified that he relied on information posted by aka “John Q Taxpayer” and “thebigdigger” to help inform his investigative reporting.

“The is a website that posts articles that contain news concerning various matters of public interest,” wrote Judge Bozza in his 19-page opinion. “[John Paul] authors articles posted on the site. Further its publication online is available to anyone who wishes to access the website. In that sense, it constitutes a newspaper of general circulation. The fact that the content is published online rather than in a traditional format is inconsequential considering the clear intent of the [Journalist’s Shield Law].”

After establishing for the first time that a new media reporter is covered by the Shield Law, Judge Bozza continued his legal analysis.

“Here the record establishes that at this stage of the proceedings the persons posting comments as ‘John Q Taxpayer’ and ‘the big digger’ were both sources of information provided to [John Paul] concerning his investigative reporting of Ms. Javens,” wrote Judge Bozza. “[Treasurer Connie Javens and Renee Javens Zuk] have argued that the comments of the posters were not news information for [John Paul] and therefore not protected. Such a conclusion would require a narrow interpretation of the Shield Law which is an approach firmly rejected by our supreme court […] The Shield Law prohibits compelling disclosure of these two identities in this litigation.”

Brian Collins, a Philadelphia based attorney with the law firm of Offit Kurman, represented the Beaver Countian in the case. Representation for the Beaver Countian was arranged by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) — the world’s leading digital civil rights organization.

“This ruling represented an expansion on the interpretation of the Shield Law,” said attorney Collins. “The Shield Law now covers new media to the same extent it covers old media. The Shield Law also now protects all journalists who want to follow up with anonymous commenters to develop stories, which can certainly help to encourage the free flow of information.”

Although Judge Bozza determined anonymous commenters not relied upon by the Beaver Countian in its reporting could not be covered by the Shield Law, he ultimately ruled all commenters’ identities would remain confidential due to the other shortcomings in the lawsuit brought by Treasurer Javens and her daughter.

“A close reading of the comments make it clear that the posters set forth very specific facts and opinions about each Plaintiff,” wrote Judge Bozza. “Concerning Ms. Javens they run the gamut from accusations of stealing and embezzling, to tampering with evidence. Regarding Ms. Zuk, the comments including allegations that she has stolen from taxpayers, has an ‘STD,’ that she has cheated on her husband and that she was a ‘slut.’ There is no evidence in the record that these assertions, as offensive as they may be, are not true.”

Judge Bozza also questioned the motives of Javens and Zuk in bringing litigation against the specific six anonymous commenters.

“There is no statement that [Treasurer Connie Javens and Renee Zuk] are acting in good faith,” wrote Judge Bozza. “Moreover they state that they need disclosure because without it they will be ‘unable to stop the defamatory attacks’ suggesting that their intent is something other than pursuing a defamation action for damages but in taking some other action to silence their critics. At the very least their intent is ambiguous.”

Judge Bozza found that some of the comments left by anonymous individuals about Renee Zuk “certainly have the potential for harming her reputation in the community and deterring third parties from associating or dealing with her,” but determined her case failed to meet threshold requirements necessary to overcome the commenters’ rights to anonymity.

Judge Bozza ruled that the public’s right to criticize Treasurer Connie Javens outweighed any interests she had in this case.

“The online comments at issue center on matters of importance concerning illegal behavior and nepotism on behalf of the county’s treasurer,” concluded Judge Bozza. “The right to speak anonymously about matters of critical importance to the citizenry cannot be compromised without substantial justification. In the circumstances of this case that right must take precedence.”

Attorney Gerald Benyo, who volunteered his time to represent John Q Taxpayer in the case, said he believes this litigation helped to further expose Treasurer Connie Javens.

“Connie Javens represents all that is wrong with an elected official,” said attorney Benyo. “Not only does she refuse to answer for violating the county code and committing acts that have gone unpunished, she had the audacity to sue voters for questioning and complaining about her actions. Being a political bully, suing taxpayers and voters and enriching her family by using her political office is reprehensible.”

Read In Full: Judge John Bozza’s Ruling Quashing A Subpoena filed against The Beaver Countian by Treasurer Connie Javens and her adult daughter Renee Zuk.

See Also: Treasurer Connie Javens Gets In Taxpayer’s Face – Starts Yelling And Pointing At Him – During Public Meeting

About The Beaver Countian’s Legal Representation


Founded in the 1980’s in Baltimore, Offit Kurman is now one of the fastest-growing full-service law firms in the region. The group has a keen understanding of the importance of the intersection of law and technology, having recently expanded their attorneys with technology focused practices including intellectual property, data and cybersecurity, and privacy issues. With 120 attorneys on staff, the firm offers a comprehensive range of services in virtually every legal category. Offit Kurman’s twelve offices serve individual and corporate clients in the Philadelphia, Washington DC, Baltimore, and New York City metropolitan areas, and markets including Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, and Northern Virginia.

Legal representation for the Beaver Countian was arranged by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), the world’s leading digital civil rights organization. The EFF was founded in 1990 to ensure that rights and freedoms are enhanced and protected as our use of technology grows. The international nonprofit organization champions causes of user privacy, free expression, and innovation through impact litigation, policy analysis, grassroots activism, and technology development. The EFF has lead litigation against the National Security Agency’s mass surveillance program in conjunction with efforts by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). A staff member for the organization served as the “digital bodyguard” for Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Glenn Greenwald, helping to secure source material provided to the reporter by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.


    • That will be a formidable feat for sure! They are so entangled and intertwined with each other which gives me concern that the courthouse will never be cleaned out. Thankful for JP and his reporting for opening our eyes to the rotten things that go on there yet seem to be covered up or not addressed at all.


  2. Well, you know what? From now on, refrain from the criticisms and comments about crude sex references and unsubstantiated claims about all these officials and focus on what we truly know is out there. I think we have all seen that ball of Play-doh is plenty big enough to get our points across about the jobs that these people are doing (or usually are not doing). They are going to be plenty challenged enough to defend their body of work and behavior.

  3. Pathetic that it had to get out of Beaver County for a fair ruling….
    What was Kunselman thinking??? OR – what does she owe Connie???

    • I’m not nor am I in any way connected to BC government. Decent people aren’t afraid to speak intelligently and not hide behind aliases. That’s the rub here. People who hide behind aliases and attempt to smear people are cowards.

      • Rebecca, Let’s rewind back a little. In reference to the widow that lost her home over $6.30 you rip the guy that bought the home at a sheriffs sale for 100K and then offered it back to her at 160K, but you failed to express any criticism about the rotten stinking county officials that allowed the home to be auctioned off in the first place. Why is that? I agree that the buyer was a rat, but isn’t the county officials that did this to her even lower than a rat? There is a reason why you hold the torch so high for county officials.

      • We are anonymous when we vote at the ballot boxes and we have the right to stay anonymous to express our opinions as voters and taxpayers.

      • You are not accepting the very real reality of retaliation, Rebecca. It exists, whether you choose to recognize it or not. And to protect oneself against it is not cowardice, but justified and smart. Smart people take the stick away from someone beating them. Take away Darwinistic defenses, and we will go back to being molecules in a primordial soup.

      • Very well fucking said. Gotta vote out or put in prison these heartless bastards that have been running our county government. My god this is like a actual war going on in this valley.

      • Did I miss Lozier’s ruling?? It appears Josey Campbell has heard the ruling???? Innocent until proven guilty? Not in beaver county

    • Sounds like you have been brainwashed by the name-calling and the fake allegations. Last I checked, she hasn’t been convicted of anything. I think that the American legal system leans toward “innocent until proven guilty.” She doesn’t get convicted by ignorant remarks from ignorant people hiding behind aliases.

    • Not neither. But as a Tax payer when I see my employees jumping into other Tax Payers faces doesn’t set well. Shouldn’t you either. Plus a lot of the other crap she has pulled that has been reported she needs to go by by

    • Again, you can’t convict someone in the court of public opinion. Sorry but if I were her, I would appeal and get a better legal team or improve their argument. No one should have to put up with the BS this woman has had to endure. “Crap” you say? I can’t think of anyone in county government who has put up with more crap than CTJ. Do I like her? I don’t know her and likely never will. Is she arrogant? Maybe…but that doesn’t make her corrupt. Know any arrogant people? I think we all do but that doesn’t give me or you or anyone else license to publicly smear someone hiding behind an alias….

    • There are legitimate reasons to use an alias. The assertion that anyone using an alias is a coward is a baseless generalization and a lame attempt to dilute the truth of the sources’ information. Nixon’s team tried that trick. If you’re too young to know the reality of Watergate, read up.

    • I have no problem if anyone speaks up against any politician. We are guaranteed that right, but the name calling, crude language and personal attacks are uncalled for.

    • Again…an anonymous SOURCE is completely different from some person sitting behind an alias and a computer screen swearing and degrading someone with name calling. If they are so confident in their views then stand behind them and put your name on it. Otherwise…you are a coward and a bully …

    • She’s on video publicly degrading and being rude to a senior citizen resident of BC… aside the paper trail that’s BOUND to catch up with her, her actions speak louder than words.

      I’m not hiding behind an alias…having been born and raised in Baden and having a business once upon a time, with all my family still there…

      She should resign from sheer embarrassment for her suspicious allegations AND obvious lack of respect for her position as a public servant to BC, NOT TO MENTION for her lack of professionalism and respect in general…

      At this point she’s just proving she’s not worthy to serve the public REGARDLESS her innocence or guilt in tax fraud.

      Mind you, SOMEONE stole from BC citizens under HER WATCH!!

      NOTE: NO CUSSING, NAME CALLING OR RECKLESS ACCUSATIONS…just common sense judgement based on personal opinion, education and professional experience.

      The general consensus among all public discussions of this matter proves the residents don’t want her in office anymore simply because they do not trust her…

      This is the first time I’ve seen anyone vehemently defend this woman on social media.

    • Your argument is baseless relative to this case. This case is about people hiding behind aliases and smearing another person/people. I don’t go for ad hominem arguments and if you want to call out your education and professionalism for your “argument” which is really no argument at all (e.g hey, the population of commenters on the Beaver Countian represents the will of the people…NOT!), then you are delusional as are those who rabidly hate her. You must have missed the class in logic…

      • lible – a published false statement that is damaging to a person’s reputation

        in order to prove lible you first have to prove your character/reputation has taken a hit

        i dont think she would have a leg to stand on to show this happened considering her reputation before any of these comments.

      • Acts Like a Duck, Walks like a Duck, Quacks like a Duck… Must be a Duck!!! Just sayin… Ms. Rebecca perhaps you should be her Criminal Defense Attorney when the time comes… Its obvious you aren’t going to win here. Mommy Dearest CJ is not voted Ms. Popularity around here…

    • But you defend her using “a defense of cowardly aliases”

      That covers everything dear. ESPECIALLY when you’re already discussing and defending her…

      Jackie Thames, WOW!!!! LOL

    • I don’t banter with individuals with weak arguments and yours are weak. Now there, I did insult you. Now run along and find someone who is like-minded so that they can agree with you. By my count, you should be able to find approximately 30-40 who will agree with you and make you feel better. Ooops – I insulted you again…lol

    • I am all for the freedom of speech. But there are imposed limits. For example, you are not allowed to yell, FIRE, in a crowded theater when there is no fire just to create choas. If you have something to say, if you have an opinion on something or someone in the public eye, then by all means say it. BUT! Be honest and and have the character to stand behind it and put your name to it!

    • Texas is large. Have a feeling it’s going to be a long hot summer this year. Why would you go to battle with these folks when you can always pick on me, and I would just laugh?

    • If I may, and only because Rebecca is tough:

      ” This case is about people hiding behind aliases and smearing another person/people.”

      Ok so what is the threshold on whether or not the medium must provide their real information upon request to the government official? Why should the forum be compelled to hand over personal information so this lady can sue (with really no estimate of actual damages to sue for) in order to shut people up, as she basically states.

      “β€œThere is no statement that [Treasurer Connie Javens and Renee Zuk] are acting in good faith,” wrote Judge Bozza. β€œMoreover they state that they need disclosure because without it they will be β€˜unable to stop the defamatory attacks’ suggesting that their intent is something other than pursuing a defamation action for damages but in taking some other action to silence their critics. At the very least their intent is ambiguous.”

      While I can understand a distaste for anonymous bashing on the internet, Rebecca, I do not see how you make any sort of legal case as to why this person should have to provide the real names. That was pretty much why the judge denied it:

      β€œThe online comments at issue center on matters of importance concerning illegal behavior and nepotism on behalf of the county’s treasurer,” concluded Judge Bozza. β€œThe right to speak anonymously about matters of critical importance to the citizenry cannot be compromised without substantial justification. In the circumstances of this case that right must take precedence.”

      What you do offer is an opinion about people bashing others online anonymously and some statement about ” I think that the American legal system leans toward “innocent until proven guilty.” She doesn’t get convicted by ignorant remarks from ignorant people hiding behind aliases.”

      Huh? What does that have to do with this case? You berate people for offering irrelevant info but then throw in that. Odd. So how is this relevant to people bashing someone online? What would that have to to with the possible pending civil case as well as the attempt to force this business, though court order, to provide the personal information of a few commentors on their site? It is completely irrelevant. Besides, being innocent until proven guilty does not mean others cannot say bad things about a person until they have been proven in criminal court. That is ridiculous.

    • Just got home from a very nice evening so I just saw this. Nice try. It is my opinion that the judge erred in his ruling. The statements that were made by the aliases were of actual malice. Look it up in case you don’t know the definition. There are precedents for this outcome to be overturned, A very public case will prove this in the next six to nine months. CTJ is not a limited purpose public figure. If I were CTJ, I would appeal the ruling and go it alone (sans daughter) on the appeal. In fact, I would not back off at this point at all. I have seen enough rhetoric and group think on this subject to last a lifetime. I am strongly opposed to these types of public personal attacks incited by a blogger for personal gratification. Two years ago, George David was the target. Last year, it was CTJ. The commenters’ identities are relevant when their comments are of actual malice. Hey, she may not pursue the appeal after all but it is her right as an American citizen.

    • Alvin Rotolo Roger that but you know me. I don’t back down and it has served me well professionally and legally so I am used to the animosity and small town BS. Too much of this insanity is flagrant in our country right now and it has to be addressed even if it is one instance at a time.

    • Becky. I understand and appreciate their anonymity There’s a place for it, but all you get back from them is name calling. This isn’t a discussion, it’s a lynch mob.

      • Rebecca –

        First realize that this lawsuit is simply a side-show for the real events.

        Whether or not Ms Javens appeals and wins or loses her appeal, there are some very troubling events that have transpired. I see that you want to defend Ms Javens in this side-show so I am very interested in how you defend the following:

        1) Ms Javens unilaterally withdrew +$6m from Beaver County Bank Accounts. PA County Code requires 3 signatures for withdrawals from County Bank Accounts. This is indisputable. Please explain how this is proper? Please also explain how if this is proper, Ms Javens has not been cleared of any wrongdoing for more than a year.

        2) The PA State Police were investigating these withdrawals in 2015. When DA Lozier took office in January 2016 (well over a year ago), he stopped the PSP investigation claiming that this was his jurisdiction. Since DA Lozier has taken responsibility for the investigation, no explanation has been given regarding why these withdrawals were legal and legitimate, yet no one has been charged for any wrongdoing. Its either one or the other. How do you explain lack of progress on supposedly legitimate actions?

        So, while we all get distracted by this side show, please step up and defend this the real show.

        My view – if Ms Javens actions were legitimate, she would explain them instead of “lawyering up” and clamming up. This simple reality is how she opened herself up for appropriate and inappropriate criticism. The ball is in her court to stop it. Explain why she isn’t doing this if her goal is to stop negative remarks about her.

    • ” It is my opinion that the judge erred in his ruling. The statements that were made by the aliases were of actual malice. Look it up in case you don’t know the definition.”

      First, lets settle down with the “in case you don’t know the definition” as this latest comment from you is the first in which you attempt to present some cogent legal argument as to why you disagree with the ruling.

      In order to have a legal case you would need to show damages, a liability. Otherwise there is nothing there. She did not do that. In fact the judge seems to suspect that the motive is really to silence critics.

      “The commenters’ identities are relevant when their comments are of actual malice.”

      Well lets look up that definition then:

      “In the context of the First Amendment, public officials and public figures must satisfy a standard that proves actual malice in order to recover for libel or slander. The standard is based upon the seminal case of new york times v. sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 84 S. Ct. 710, 11 L. Ed. 2d 686 (1964), where the Supreme Court held that public officials and public figures cannot be awarded damages unless they prove that the person accused of making the false statement did so with knowledge that the statement was false or with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of the statement. Demonstrating malice in this context does not require the plaintiff to show that the person uttering the statement showed ill will or hatred toward the public official or public figure.”

      So it seems you got the malice then you got the damages. Pretty big hill to climb, and it seems she had not really begun the ascent. It seems your real issue is more here:

      “I am strongly opposed to these types of public personal attacks incited by a blogger for personal gratification.”

      Be that as it may, your opinion on the matter is not sufficient to pierce the veil of anonymity. Malice + Damages is required, and I would have to think that a good deal of proof would be needed before politicians could force media to disclose identities so that politician can drag them through enough legal hoops to shut them up. Especially when the damages of what some yahoo said on the internet are going to be questionable.

  4. πŸ™Œ πŸ™ŒπŸ™Œ πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘
    πŸ’– U JP

  5. Big win for EFF and Benyo. I expected Connie to lose, but the allegations for affairs were borderline harassment. The judge really slapped both of them and their lawyer down.

  6. Congratulations JP! Thank you Judge Bozza and Gerald Benyo!

    Now, if Dave Looser would do HIS job, maybe We-The-People could get some justice.


    “If the Freedom of Speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter” – George Washington

  7. I have a feeling that from the beginning you had a gut feeling that you knew the cases had no merit, and JP, you knew how to deal with it. But I know if no one else who could have carried it through. I have said before that you are an exceptional person, and this area is very fortunate to have you at the right place and right time to deal with the problems. I hope the rewards are enough to keep you here. Few people make significant positive material changes in society, and you are one of that elite group.

    January 25, 2018 is the deadline for Pulitzer Prize journalism entries for work published online or in print in 2017. Go to the site and you can read entries that have won and do not equal your work. You deserve it, and I don’t think another year should pass without an entry for you.

  8. Only cowards make rude and ignorant comments using an alias. If you are so outspoken…own it like a grown person. Everyone has a right to face their accuser….except on the Nat’l Enquirer…oops I mean the Beaver Countian Website. Sad excuse for journalism.

    • Why follow this page then? Most of us appreciate the amazing reporting that the beaver countian does. Journalism has required anonymous sources for the end of time. I would think people would appreciate a reporter or organization that investigates wrongdoings or local corrupt politicians.

    • Amazing reporting? What a joke. Typical BC…wouldn’t know good journalism if it bit you. I am not commenting on guilt or corrupt politicians. Anonymous SOURCES are a completely different thing than some idiot sitting behind an alias and a computer screen spouting off his mouth with swear words and name calling.

    • Mary Fran Barbato Smith You must be a friend of Connie Javens….either that or you obviously don’t know that journalism requires that sometimes people’s names and address remain confidential. Don’t like it? Don’t read the page…..Most of us that do, praise the Beaver Countian for it’s wonderful reporting about what goes on with our tax dollars.

    • It has nothing to do with being a friend or not. It has to do with ethical journalism..which apparently nobody here understands. I don’t read the rag for the way he lets people make inane comments that do not contribute to a conversation other than calling someone a name like a schoolyard bully….he is as biased as they come but of course people that read his website don’t care. They like gossip and innuendo.

      • Mary Fran Barbato Smith, you must read “the rag” since you are here making comments. In case you don’t know, this publication reports primarily on political corruption, malfeasance and the fleecing of taxpayers. That being said, what kind of comments do you think you will see here? Nobody here is interested in your self promoting, self righteous comments. Pack it up and go home lady.

      • @maryfran- The”Brilliant comeback,”(if intended for you) by HannaFargo gave you what you asked for, a name not just an anonymous SOURCE.
        YOUR WORDS : “Anonymous SOURCES are a completely different thing than some IDIOT sitting behind an alias and a computer screen spouting off his mouth with swear words and name calling” name calling, idiot, your idea of flattery?
        You throw around “EVERYONE ON HERE” too often in your comments. Re read, the above article…. Give me an example where you feel John Paul is being Bias. I maybe wrong but I only read a factual report.

    • So in other words, you are her friend but don’t want to admit it? If you think the Beaver Countian not censoring comments and allowing followers to express their opinions through rights afforded them by the Constitution of the United States is “irresponsible journalism” I have no words. Listen , it’s 2017. People use screen names, aliases and other weird handles. If you can’t handle that, stay off the interwebs.

    • I have met her. This has nothing to do with that at all. I have seen comments on other articles calling people rude disgusting names. It is the reason I don’t usully read his crap. But hey…enjoy the playground. Seems all of you have not grown up yet.

      • met her? you have two of her relatives as friends on your fb…i think you more than met her

      • @maryfranbarbutosmithlmnop-
        It is the reason I don’t usully (corrected spelling-usually) read HIS CRAP.
        Seems ….”ALL OF YOU”…. have not grown up yet.
        I was wrong, iwas tHinkin maYbe you weren’tno buffoon.

    • You remind me of our 14-year-old president. I hear bunch of words come out of your mouth that make absolutely no sense! Go back to the geriatrics home and bitch about your children! You’re opinion really does not matter and do us all a favor and stop following this page.

    • Why are you on here then? Just keep burying your head in the sand or the world reknown Pulitzer Prize winning beaver county times as they fawn over the very crooked political thieves that are robbing the taxpayers. But you were “educated” in Quiptown so you have no concept of public corruption or family n friends job rigging! Don’t follow this site as you may become educated in the ways of the modern political injustices.

    • Have you never seen what can happen to whistle blowers? Maybe just maybe that’s why they did it this way. Friend or no friend they are wrong and I don’t have to read the Beaver count ian to know this.

    • Frank Helisek…I assume you are one of the ignorant people that comment and make fun of people…like you did to me. You just proved my point about not having anything constructive to say so you make fun of people and call them names. Hope you feel good about yourself now. Try having a decent conversation sometime. And for your info…I didn’t vote for the mess in the WH…unlike most of you BC people. You like to be bullies…but cry when it is directed at you.

    • And yours means less to me. Thanks for your service to this country. I do appreciate it. And I get free speech. But speech has consequences. And not standing up for what you believe and just name calling doesn’t make any difference in the world. That is my point. But go ahead and keep making fun of me. It is your right I guess.

  9. Let’s have a pity party for the Queen and her family of losers and lowlifes sucking the taxpayers teats until they are dry. Now if we could only get Stonewall off his lazy ass and get cracking on that investigation before the grand jury shows up. Very soon the whole house of cards is going to come crashing down. The Queen has finally been told HELL NO by someone who has the balls to actually interpret the law and apply it without fear of retribution or retaliation. I hope when all is said and done that her and her familial pack of jackaals have to repay every cent stolen or misappropriated from the taxpayers including the HUD money for landscaping and the fancy cement pond. May a curse descend upon her and her family lasting for 100 years of maladies and miseries. Karrma is a bitch!

  10. I think a few of the ladies making idiotic comments neglected to take their medication, or should we excuse them because “it is that time of the month.” Now I wonder if those that the Treasurer named can sue her.

  11. Gerald Benyo’s court filing for John Q. was a virtual summary and defense of the background of the case against Connie. I have to believe the judge read it very carefully and respected it as part of his deliberating. Thanks, Gerald Benyo.

  12. Wow! A Javens finally told “no” a remarkable day for the justice system. A real shot to the family ego that’s been doing what every they please for decades. Folks, history has been made . Time to sip a glass of wine and think soon she will try to run again lol. A young person I hope gets the job. Bye bye Connie a farewell to you and your facades……

  13. For all the people who don’t like her, you would think she would have been voted out by now…
    I never vote for the same politician twice, once they’re in office for so long they get too comfortable, and either become corrupt or get more corrupted than they already were. There needs to be term limits on every elected office.

    • The issue is, most just vote party ticket, and honestly really do not pay attention to what those in the county are doing. Therefore we have a huge class of non-informed voters, that base their vote on basically nothing, or they base it on recognizing a name, and therefore a useless vote.

    • You are exactly right. I just thought that after so long, and so much of this that even the straight ticket voters would wake up. Their ignorance is keeping us in the hole with these corrupt people ripping off the taxpayers year after year. 😠

  14. @Mary ann barbato Smith



    #javens lost lol LOL

    • Judge Bozza,
      I would like to commend you for seeing Connie’s family for who they really are of course. See in life when you are on top and think you are controlling it everything around you could fall. Wether it’s age like it is in this case her past has finally caught up with her and her spoiled daughter. They are falling off the stool of monarchy where she once controlled. What’s hard in life is when you fall and hit hard. The dynamic duo are too dumb to realize and shes too dumb too resign on her power trip. Her daughter has to follow her lead or mom won’t pay her bills. If, she isn’t losing it why did she go off on a poor old veteran that served and protected us. When questions where asked her job to explain instead, she went off on him to show her guilt. Her guilt of friendship ridge and never talking. These guilts will slowly deminish her and have so far. She will fall as life takes us all . She needs to walk away and ask for forgiveness what little time she has left…..

  15. Believe me, anyone here that is speaking out in Javens defense has probably benefited or hope to benefit in the form of a job or a job for a family member consummated from her position or conjured up in the back room of the treasures office. I’m assuming some of you are PA Turnpike workers.

  16. You are to be congratulated, John Q. Taxpayer for your diligent work. In combination with attorney Gerald Benyo, you most likely had a significant effect upon the outcome of this case. So, thanks.

    • Well thank you Raven. As you already know I had an excellent attorney. JP and Mr. Benyo deserve all the credit here. I am greatly thankful to both of them, along with Judge Bozza.

  17. Mary Fran Barbato Smith: You are naive. Just by commenting under your Facebook page name, you open yourself up to vetters and trolls alike who will look up your personal information, and at times, use it against you. Not fair? Sure. But not protecting yourself from that is self-defeating. This is not the Hallmark Channel, and people get very angry about the corruption in this county. And if they use some colorful language at times, give them some slack. It is not cowardice to remain anonymous, it is smart, it is a recognition of reality.

    Do you even know what this lawsuit was about? That’s right, the issue of anonymous First Amendment speech — that you are attacking — in a publication. Your moralism might sound fine in church, but here, it just doesn’t fit.

    Consider that if Connie Javens would have just explained her actions in the Friendship Ridge deal at the very beginning, even an honest mea culpa, this lawsuit might never have been made possible. But, she stonewalled, as has Lozier, and people got very upset over those things. So, they spoke out in the only ways they could.

    Now we still are faced with widespread mistrust, and much of that is of her own making.

    • And you can bet your bottom dollar that Javens, LaValle and others worked very hard to put preempted stink on that deal right from the very start. Now most of them are sitting back in their recliners waiting for their county pension checks every month. Profiteers on the backs of the taxpayers. They should hang their heads in shame when facing their neighbors and the taxpayers that file in and out of that courthouse. SHAME SHAME ON YOU! Shame on investigators for doing absolutely nothing about it!

    • @Raven … excellent response! Clear concise and relatively small words were used. That in and of itself is to be commended considering the average Connie the Con supporter is most likely illiterate, disingenuous, or simply family. Probably some combination of all three! Mungo thinks ole typhoid mary the critical, Connie the Con cheerleader should bow out gracefully
      on this support mission before making Mrs/Mr Raven curios enough to start perusing above mentioned facebook profile and finding the “real ” connection by way of basic flowcharting!
      But oh well this is supposed to be a joyous occasion!! As always Mr Taxpayer congrats and if there is to be any countersuit Mungo likes to believe he should also enjoy in any punitive damages! Most all of us here deserve some sort of punitive damages that we have received simply for being subjected to the photos of the crypt keeper that JP has to use for this subject matter. This is Mungos opinion and he firmly stands by it! Or not, all depends on wheter or not he gets to stay anonymous! Cuz his taxes are already too damn HI!!!

      • Thank you Mr. Mungo. I had the privilege and advantage of a golden attorney, Mr. Benyo with the Midas touch.

    • @JamesAllread2 you say “I don’t like anonymous sources.” That’s your opinion, but guess what … A judge felt a bit different, and ruled on the matter.
      I was present when Connie felt it was necessary to go nose to nose with a veteran/taxpayer, unfiltered and waving her finger in this mans face. Poor Connie my ass and what anyone feels she deserves. An elected official who did not take the time to weigh the outcome of her actions. Many questions are now surfacing that should have been dealt with prior to the online reporting by the BeaverCountian. Toughen up, speak your mind, offer your opinion, give credit, try to stay on point, and be a part of good government. Congratulations John Paul and Thank You!

  18. Oh yea people, we don’t need to use such derogatory language to try to get our point across. You only make yourself look and sound like unschooled. You probably are not so don’t do it. She wins when she sees and hears this.

  19. I am all for the freedom of speech, but even our society has put limits on it. For example, you are not allowed to yell, “FIRE”, in a crowded theater when there is no fire just to create chaos. If you have an opinion about something or someone in the public eye, then by all means you have the right to express it. BUT! Have the decency and character and respect your own convictions by putting your name to it! Any coward can say ANYTHING under the cloak of anonymity.

  20. In the end, the language of the commenters is irrelevant.

    Reread the article if you have to, and you will see that the Javens did not make their case. They did not prove the comments untrue, and the language did not qualify to affect the law.

    Reread it three more times, and you will see that many of the complaints here are irrelevant too.

    And for God’s sake, reread it five more times until you understand that the BC is a legitimate news source with legitimate sources and with a legitimate editor/owner.

    The BC has become a legitimate force to contend with, like it or not, and there are some people at the Courthouse who will no longer call it a blog or the owner a blogger. And some will now take extra caution to do what is right and avoid being caught in its crosshairs.

      • @james t kirk – great investigative work, space cadet! If the Times should ever part ways with star reporter/journalist(typed with a laugh) Tom Davidson, I think you have a shot.

      • Captain Kirk: In my humble opinion:

        A blog is a group-based, personalized contribution of individually experienced events, usually subjective, presented to be part of a larger whole to which one contributes, and usually involving a “theme”.

        To descriptively report on verifiable social events, online, based upon shared common knowledge of a group, vetted as objectively as possible for widespread distribution, is reporting. (Raven’s “Dictionary of Everyday Knowledge”).

        Or, you can just read the Judge’s explanation above.

        Use blog, if you wish, I prefer news medium. And this news medium is the one which is offering a lifeboat to the Beaver County Times, which will pass into print paper history by 2020, if not sooner.

        It doesn’t really matter that much. Now, however, the Beaver Countian has reached full validation in the light of what has happened here. That is historic, and news sources online across the commonwealth have gained from that.

        Sometimes thinking from the 1970’s has to be upgraded to present times, or little progress is made in computer history.

  21. I love all the commenters stating we are cowards hiding behind aliases, the sad fact the Treasurer’s penchant for suing and I wonder how they would react if her finger was wagging in front of their face. As politicians need to be reminded, they work for us, we pay their inflated salaries and I am a firm believer in term limits.



Please enter your comment!

Please enter your name here