Posted on 04/04/2007 7:40:07 AM PDT by TrebleRebel
A federal judge is prodding lawyers for a scientist investigated in connection with the anthrax attacks in 2001, Steven Hatfill, to escalate a battle with the press by insisting that reporters identify anonymous government sources who linked Mr. Hatfill to the probe.
Judge Reggie Walton issued an order last week warning Mr. Hatfill that he may lose his civil lawsuit over the leaks if he does not compel journalists to name their sources. "A wealth of case law suggests that in order to prove that a violation of the Privacy Act has occurred, the actual source of the information must be identified," the judge wrote. "Whether the plaintiff can satisfy this requirement with circumstantial evidence alone is an endeavor the plaintiff assumes at his peril if he decides to not further identify the source or sources of the purported improper disclosures."
Mr. Hatfill's legal team has taken depositions from journalists at ABC, CBS, Newsweek, and the Washington Post. The scientist's lawyers thought they had averted a First Amendment clash by crafting a deal under which the reporters withheld the names of their sources but divulged their affiliation with the FBI or Justice Department.
Judge Walton, who recently saw several high-profile journalists on the witness stand as he oversaw the trial of I. Lewis Libby Jr., gave Mr. Hatfill until April 16 to decide whether to press the press to give up its sources. An attorney for Mr. Hatfill, Thomas Connolly, did not return a call seeking comment for this article.
Neither Mr. Hatfill nor anyone else has been charged with producing the anthrax-laden mailings, which are believed to have killed at least five people.
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
ping
Insisting that reporters out their sources? I thought this was already established law that reporters didn’t have to do that.
Well when the reporters are acting as stooges for the Government, the lines on who is being protected by the Comstution get blurred.
Actually, no such thing has ever been established on the federal level, although some states have passed "shield laws". In fact, a couple of recent high-profile cases have established that just the opposite can be true. Are you familiar with Judith Miller of the New York Times? She did some jail time for contempt of court for refusing such an order.
It is of course inevitable that the scumbag Kristof and all his fellow ilk will refuse to name their sources even on threat of jail time. And then we will have yet another interesting situation here as well for Judge Walton.
I hadn’t realized it was states that had the shield law vs. the feds. And yes, I remember the Miller case quite well, of course.
I wonder if this judge is hoping that Hatfield will try and force reporters to out their sources and the sources will damage the WH. I doubt the outcome of that scenario because I don’t see the WH naming Hatfield, but maybe the judge’s hope springs eternal.
I think he should press the issue, and let the reporters rot in jail for helping do this to him.
I think so, too. The problem is: If the reporters didn't actually get their information from FBI agents working on the case, it could hurt Dr. Hatfill's lawsuit.
Dr. Hatfill is suing the FBI and DOJ for violating the Privacy Act by giving reporters confidential information about him from confidential government files.
If it turns out that the reporters' sources were DOJ or FBI employees (or agents) who were not actually working on the case but who were just hearing rumors and telling the reporters about the rumors, then the Privacy Act was not violated.
I believe there have been some instances in the depositions where it was shown that information reported by the media was FALSE and did NOT come from the FBI or DOJ. There was one CBS situation, for example, where the reporter said one thing on air and some technician said something else when putting the story on their web site.
This situation is a LOT more complicated than it appears. A band of conspiracy theorists was pestering the mediia and the FBI for eight months prior to the first search of Dr. Hatfill's apartment. A lot of what those people were telling the FBI and the media could be the source of the "rumors" that eventually became reported as leaks to the media by the FBI.
Who leaked data? Ask Linda Tripp about this.
Actually, no such thing has ever been established on the federal level ...
Not only has such a thing never been established on the federal level, it has been ruled against on a federal level many times.
In the Wen Ho Lee case, the lawyers for Dr. Hatfill filed an amicus curiae brief detailing the law as it stood on such matters.
The media does NOT have the legal right to destroy a person with rumor and innuendo without the harmed person having any recourse to find out who made the claims against him. All Americans have the right to face their accusors in court.
There are BIG issues at play here.
Even more interesting, what if he compels Hatfiill to reveal what OTHER sources he has, including, perhaps, some Middle Eastern sources?
Or not. It could also be that he’s dirty as hell.
It sounds more like a warning than an urging.
Sir, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, you know nothing whatsoever about these cases, and you're just embarrassing yourself with utterly nonsensical statements like this.
Do yourself a favor and stick to the bad political predictions.
Fact: only a handful of people in this country, and fewer still internationally, had expertise in this kind of anthrax. SH was one.
Fact: none of the Middle Easterners had demonstrated facility with this straing.
Fact: SH was an instructor for defense contractors who had not only worked with this stuff, but had taught others to do so.
It's not rocket science. Who knows why he did what he did---and I don't rule out duress, threats to his family, or whomever from the person/persons who actually used it. But he knows more than he's telling, and he better watch out by trying to force people to "tell what they know."
Hatfill never worked directly with anthrax in his entire life. His training was in virology, not bacteriology.
ping
And you don't have to pay attention to any of my political predictions.
Ping.
And you don't have to pay attention to any of my political predictions.
It's true that I don't have to, but it's too hard for me not to laugh at you when you insist on continuing to make such a fool of yourself over and over again. You really ought to listen to the people who actually have something between their ears.
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.