Are there any public court records for Phil Godlewski in federal or state databases?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Public court records tied to Philip (Phil) Godlewski exist in multiple public-reporting sources and online docket aggregators: reporting and court dockets show a 2010 criminal case in Lackawanna County, Pa., and subsequent civil litigation (including a defamation suit) that produced published court filings and appellate entries [1] [2] [3] [4]. Commercial background sites and news outlets have republished or summarized those records, but access and specific docket details vary by platform and may be sealed in places [1] [5] [6].
1. Court files and news coverage converge: a 2010 criminal docket and later civil suits
Local and national reporting point to an indictment and court proceedings from about 2009–2010 involving Godlewski and a minor; those criminal records were the focus of later reporting and became part of civil litigation when Godlewski sued a newspaper for defamation, prompting the newspaper to file motions that cited the earlier court materials [2] [7] [8]. Justia’s federal-docket index and a Pennsylvania Superior Court decision list Godlewski-party litigation, indicating federal and state dockets referencing “Godlewski” [3] [4].
2. Primary public docket source: Pennsylvania Unified Judicial System portal
A direct state-court docket sheet for Lackawanna County (docket number CP-35-CR-0002613-2010) appears in search results, showing a “Godlewski, Philip” entry and filings including motions about access to sealed records — signaling that at least some filings are publicly listed though certain documents or entries may be restricted or sealed [1]. The portal itself warns that recent entries may not appear immediately, a typical caveat for official court sites [1].
3. How news reporting used those records — and what it revealed
Investigative and mainstream outlets (Rolling Stone, Raw Story, The Daily Beast as cited in other pieces) used court filings and docket material to report that Godlewski faced charges tied to a relationship with a 15‑year‑old in 2008–2010; that reporting also covers the defamation suit he filed against the Scranton Times‑Tribune and the paper’s subsequent motion accusing him of perjury and seeking additional damages [2] [7] [8]. Those articles quote court filings and summarize the criminal and civil allegations [2] [7].
4. Aggregators and background-check sites republish but caution on accuracy
Commercial people-search and background services (Spokeo, Radaris, SearchPeopleFree) list multiple profiles for “Phil/Philip Godlewski,” include phone numbers and address history, and sometimes flag criminal or court records — but they explicitly warn matches may be based on name only and may not refer to the same individual [6] [5] [9]. Use these with caution; they are secondary compilations, not primary court records [6].
5. Federal docket traces and appellate activity exist but require targeted searching
Justia’s index and an entry for a Pennsylvania Superior Court opinion show litigation captions that include Godlewski, indicating state superior-court and possibly federal filings connected to his disputes [3] [4]. The presence on Justia and in appellate databases suggests docketed opinions or filings are publicly viewable through those services or via the relevant court clerks’ offices [3] [4].
6. Access limitations and sealed-material flags — what to expect if you look
The state docket sheet result includes items titled “Motion in Opposition to Obtain Access to Sealed Court Records” and similar entries, which means some documents may be under sealing motions or protective orders and not freely downloadable [1]. Where newspapers report specific criminal-allegation details, they quote or summarize court filings; however, the portal’s own language warns about delayed or redacted entries [1].
7. Conflicting narratives and agendas in secondary sources
News outlets reporting the story framed it as an exposé of an online conspiracy figure; blogs and legal commentary (e.g., Virtus Vincit blog, Techdirt aggregations) present critical or mocking takes on Godlewski and his litigation strategy, sometimes citing specific court rulings that rejected his claims [10] [11]. Commercial data‑broker pages emphasize contact details and background records for users seeking leads, creating an incentive to aggregate broadly [6] [5]. These differing agendas — investigative reporting vs. legal commentary vs. paid aggregators — shape what is emphasized and how records are presented [2] [11] [6].
8. Practical next steps if you need original records
To obtain primary filings, consult the Pennsylvania Unified Judicial System portal for the Lackawanna County docket number shown (CP‑35‑CR‑0002613‑2010) and the relevant Superior Court opinion number or Justia entries [1] [4] [3]. If documents are sealed, the docket will reflect sealing motions [1]. Commercial aggregators can point to names and summaries but do not substitute for certified court records [6] [5].
Limitations: available sources do not mention full-text links to every filing here; I rely on the provided search results that reference dockets, news reports and aggregators [1] [2] [6].