When Is Reporting Technology Overkill - Ethics and Information
Last month marked my first coverage of a murder trial. I was there from jury selection to the reading of the verdict. I was armed with the latest in high tech blogging technology. Camera - Wi-fi Detector - Video Camera - Marantz (courtesy of KRZK) and the mobile digital editing station I’m using now. I posted some of the information; put video clips on-line. Made my peace with the victims mother. In the end I published a multi-page story in the Taney County Times - Wrote Copy and submitted soundbites for 3 radio broadcasts and a couple blog posts, 10 hours of audio and several hours of video footage remain that I haven’t published. Many clipped jurors and a firm warning was delivered by Judge Orr. Publish those and go to jail for contempt. Needless to say they’ve remained unpublished. But is there a time when the historical record should be published? Certainly now is not the time and having a warning from the judge I wouldn’t dream of publishing it. My brothers at the Cincinati Enquirer didn’t show enough restraint last week and have formally made an apology.
Posted: February 26th, 2007 under Journalism.
Comments: 2
Comments
Comment from Scott Bratcher
Time: February 27, 2007, 10:23 am
I wonder if it is just a matter of protecting the sensitivities of those involved. Similar to how certain government documents may be declassified after the powers-that-were have rolled out of status completely.
I am inclined to ask why is it actually a secret. Was it a closed courtroom? Was the public NOT allowed to attend. If not, why? If the public was allowed to attend, why should any words or actions need to remain hidden that were openly committed to in the courtroom? Were the restricted recordings from private moments in the judges chambers?
Anytime I hear that something is not for public release that is pertaining to the public society (not military security) I ask myself, “Who is hiding what from me?”
Comment from Darin Codon
Time: February 27, 2007, 11:37 am
Thanks Scott,
I need to make a post on this. I was given a Media Guide to the courtrooms - It’s a book published by the Bar Association. The Missouri Supreme court has ruled that camera’s are allowed in the courtroom. Each circuit court has a designated media contact…(more on this later)…. Attorney’s can file a motion to bar reporters from covering certain events. The idea here is that it’s possible for the right to a fair trial could be quashed by a press blitz.
Giving out jurors faces and names is a different story. Technically, it isn’t illegal - however, most see it as an ethical violation. In the trial I covered it was alledged that Bescher went to great lenghts to threaten witnesses. For protection of the Jurors most media outlets make the choice to not print pictures of the jurors. In my case it was part of the judges orders. It was also an order to make materials available to other media outlets which I did by releasing information through the Associated Press (AP).
The courts are very specific what is on and off the record. Evidence has to go through a hearing to be accepted and can be fought.
In one recent case there was a video tape of someone commiting a crime in Branson. The video was given to authorities but Miranda rights were not read. Since the officer considered the people she was talking to a suspect evidence obtained wasn’t admissable…..
Write a comment