Game of Wiping Our Butts on Freedom of the Press

[valkyrie]

Reporters could face more prison time than BALCO dealers
By DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer
May 9, 2006

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Five people linked to the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative were convicted of doling out steroids to elite athletes. But in an ironic twist, two San Francisco Chronicle writers who reported on the probe could end up serving more jail time than any of them.

Lance Williams and Mark Fainaru-Wada are the latest reporters to become entangled in the federal government's ramped-up efforts to investigate leaks. They have been subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury investigating who leaked them the secret testimony of Barry Bonds, Jason Giambi and others.

The Chronicle, which published the testimony in a series of stories beginning in late 2004, is challenging the subpoena, arguing that the First Amendment protects the reporters and their sources.

Both reporters say they aren't going to talk -- which means they could be fined and jailed until they divulge their sources, or sentenced to a fixed term for contempt.

Read the full story here.

[macallan25]

From what I understand, the testimony was private and was restricted by law for use between the individuals that were involved with those court proceedings.

I was listening to ESPN Radio this morning and they had a legal advisor on and he said that from what it appears under the circumstances, First Amendment rights were not broken because the information was illegaly leaked.

[Optimist Prime]

The entire Bill of Rights is being trampeled upon.


This makes me a sad rattlesnake

[valkyrie]

Originally posted by macallan25
From what I understand, the testimony was private and was restricted by law for use between the individuals that were involved with those court proceedings.

I was listening to ESPN Radio this morning and they had a legal advisor on and he said that from what it appears under the circumstances, First Amendment rights were not broken because the information was illegaly leaked.

I'm not disputing that leaking the information was not legal. However, I don't think that means the reporters should be held in contempt for refusing to reveal their sources.

I look at it like this: It's a violation of the law to possess crack. However, the cops can't stop you on the street for no reason because the Constitution provides that we have the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. That right means that the police can't stop you for no reason (more or less, depending on where you are).

It's a violation of the law to leak the information that was leaked here. However, the Constitution provides protections for a free press. That right means that the government can't compel reporters to reveal their sources even if the sources obtained that information in a manner that violates the law. Of course, others (including courts) might disagree).

[KSig RC]

Originally posted by valkyrie
I'm not disputing that leaking the information was not legal. However, I don't think that means the reporters should be held in contempt for refusing to reveal their sources.

I look at it like this: It's a violation of the law to possess crack. However, the cops can't stop you on the street for no reason because the Constitution provides that we have the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. That right means that the police can't stop you for no reason (more or less, depending on where you are).

It's a violation of the law to leak the information that was leaked here. However, the Constitution provides protections for a free press. That right means that the government can't compel reporters to reveal their sources even if the sources obtained that information in a manner that violates the law. Of course, others (including courts) might disagree).

I think the important thing to remember here is that this is mostly a power play by the FBI to try to discover where the leaks were coming from.

When the grand jury investigation was taking place, the FBI etc. assumed the leaks were coming from Victor Conte himself - and while some were, the information in Game of Shadows goes FAR above and beyond what Conte could have told them. This is (obviously) scaring the shit out of the Feds, because they have dozens more of these kinds of cases in the pocket (not necessarily pro athletes, but some - mostly other producers of 'designer' steroids) and they don't want to get blown out.

It's a difficult line to walk - I'm not even 100% sure where I stand, because the notion of 'free press' as written in the Constitution really didn't foresee these kinds of things, and I'm not really up on the current Review on this matter . . . it seems like this is exactly the 'fine line', though, and that this case may actually set the precedent. Thanks Barry!

[Tom Earp]

Federal Bureau of Incomptents!

Want recognition hogs.

Ask any real COPS!

[DeltAlum]

So someone illegally leaks information to a reporter, and the reporter goes to jail?

What am I missing?

[Rudey]

Originally posted by DeltAlum
So someone illegally leaks information to a reporter, and the reporter goes to jail?

What am I missing?

Someone sells me stolen merchandise or gives me drugs. Guess what happens. I have a party. That's what happens. But after that, the po-po put me in the can and then I wear striped pajamas (I prefer them over orange jumpsuits) and clink my metal cup against the bars all day singing "Memories".

-Rudey