Posted on 11/03/2006 5:52:51 AM PST by aculeus
WASHINGTON, Nov. 2 — A federal judge in Virginia on Thursday upheld a ruling by a magistrate judge that The New York Times must disclose the identities of three sources used by Nicholas D. Kristof for columns he wrote on the deadly anthrax mailings of 2001.
The judge, Claude M. Hilton of Federal District Court, ruled that last month’s opinion was “not clearly erroneous or contrary to law.”
The order is part of a case of defamation brought against The Times by Stephen J. Hatfill, who asserts that columns by Mr. Kristof suggested he was responsible for the attacks.
The ruling is likely to make it more difficult for The Times to defend the lawsuit when the case goes to trial because a judge may instruct the jury to give less credibility to assertions that the columns had been based on legitimate and knowledgeable sources. Because it is a civil case rather than a criminal one, there is little chance of anyone from The Times facing the possibility of being jailed over contempt charges.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Will the Times opt for paying, rather than divulging their 'sourcs'?
This is outrageous. The judge has ruled that The New York Times can't get its way in court by stamping its foot and yelling, "because I say so! </sarcasm>
They probably used the same "sources" they used in all of their political pieces. Bigfoot, Easter Bunny, Santa Claus.
Acorn registers all the cartoon characters to vote. All the dem districts simply ignore the phony registrations so they can be included in the final count.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.