Going To Jail For Doing Your Job Is Not The American Way Of Justice If Lance Williams and Mark Fainaru-Wada go to jail for doing their job, this will be another black eye in American history and by all accounts, it may be the case. As many already know, Williams and Fairnaru-Wada have done a series of investigative pieces on the BALCO case and thanks to much of their hard work, columnists like myself have been able to expound, enlighten, infuriate and even chastise numerous subjects on this matter.As a candidate, I support(ed) the crafting and enforcement of great 'shield' laws.
But what they are known for right now is the fact that their work has gotten rave reviews from common people who are not even sports fans to the President of the United States for the steroids issue. Congress moved on hearings because of their work. And that’s the irony because now the very government that applauded them in 2003 is now trying to put them in jail three years later.
'It's a tragedy that the government seeks to put reporters in jail for doing their job,' said San Francisco Chronicle executive vice president and editor Phil Bronstein after the hearing.
Monday, September 25, 2006
Going To Jail For Doing Your Job Is Not The American Way Of Justice
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
In the past, didn't Bill Peduto want a full investigation and possible charges against the journalist(s) who reported on some back-room dealings that violated sunshine laws?
How many times are you ever going to hear a candidate talk about 'shield laws?'
Going To Jail For Doing Your Job Is Not The American Way Of Justice
by Gregory Moore,
gmoore@blackathlete.net
published on Sep 24, 2006
SAN ANTONIO – If Lance Williams and Mark Fainaru-Wada go to jail for doing their job, this will be another black eye in American history and by all accounts, it may be the case. As many already know, Williams and Fairnaru-Wada have done a series of investigative pieces on the BALCO case and thanks to much of their hard work, columnists like myself have been able to expound, enlighten, infuriate and even chastise numerous subjects on this matter.
But what they are known for right now is the fact that their work has gotten rave reviews from common people who are not even sports fans to the President of the United States for the steroids issue. Congress moved on hearings because of their work. And that’s the irony because now the very government that applauded them in 2003 is now trying to put them in jail three years later.
"It's a tragedy that the government seeks to put reporters in jail for doing their job," said San Francisco Chronicle executive vice president and editor Phil Bronstein after the hearing.
For many who are not sports fans or who are not really up to speed on this case, this is a perfect history lesson on the U.S. Constitution and legal rights between states and the federal government. At the crux of this case is what many call in the field of journalism a ‘shield’ law.
Of the 50 states in the union, 31 of them actually have a shield law in place that protects journalists against federal prosecution when confidential sources are used in a story that is for the public good. California has one but it only has ‘state’ power; not federal. What many want is a federal shield law that will supercede the states’ laws and provide better protection.
That would be great in this case because the two Chronicle writers are not criminals; despite what federal prosecutors may think and believe. If this is ever a case to actually remind federal prosecutors that the public’s safety is vital, this is it. Unlike what Greg Anderson, Barry Bonds’ trainer is doing, by Williams and Fainaru-Wada refusing to testify means that they want to protect the identities of their sources and they want to ensure that future sources can trust them.
To put it in simple terms, think of these two reporters as the pen police who use confidential informants. You can put them into the same category as the undercover officer who use confidential informants to help prosecutors get charges and convictions of the bad guys.
If an undercover officer was forced to name the confidential informant in many cases, we would have many criminals on the street and that officer’s livelihood and life would be in jeopardy. Now I’m not saying that the reporters’ lives would be in danger if they did reveal the identities of the sources but their livelihoods and their reputations would be utterly destroyed.
But the government does not see it that way. To U.S. attorney, Douglas Miller believes that the reporters should be jailed because they are impeding his investigation.
"Only imprisonment would be the type of sanction that's going to get their attention.”
Maybe Mr. Miller doesn’t get it. These reporters’ attentions are already enlightened. The very reason why he even has a case is because of the work these two writers have put forth and instead of him thanking them for their service, he wants to put them in jail.
Talk about being an ungrateful, spoiled brat who doesn’t get his way. It’s a tragedy that the government is willing to prosecute someone for doing his or her job of reporting and bring awareness to an issue.
The sad part about this is that the U.S. government will continue to persecute reporters because they want some sort of censorship on some stories that are coming out. Let us not forget that in the current administration, New York Times reporter Judith Miller was jailed for 85 days last year for refusing to testify in an investigation into the leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame's name.
The government has yet to really go after the very person in charge of the leak because the blood trail leads right back to Vice President Dick Chaney. But Ms. Miller had to endure having a criminal record with no apology whatsoever from the government that she is probably very proud of (not the administration mind you, but the institution).
Well, if the 9th Circuit of Appeals does not give these two writers any relief, the government will be 3-0 in jailing reporters who are reporting on federal issues and providing a necessary service to the country’s citizens in their investigative reporting.
Here’s where things can become really dicey though and Mr. Miller and others should really take a close look at the situation. Forget about the fact that these two writers wrote about steroids. They are investigative reporters. Without these reporters doing their jobs, this country will not be the beneficiary of knowing about illegal activities of any sort on any level.
Without an investigative reporter being able to do his or her job, lives literally will not be saved but wasted. Products will be dangerous for us to use. Crimes will go unmolested by the judicial system because they will not have the manpower to use their own undercover agents to find out what’s going on.
In essence, if the federal government continues to be able to jail reporters for any myriad of reasons that is befitting to their own causes, a resource of news gathering under the first amendment will be forever broken.
This may sound like an unwarranted diatribe for many but take this story for what it is; two reporters are going to jail for doing their jobs. If President Bush was serious about anything he has said in any of his State of the Union addresses, he would come to the aid of these reporters and Congress would follow suit with speedy passage of a shield law that allows such reporters to continue to give us, the readers and viewers, the information necessary for a safer America.
Post a Comment