Posted on 08/20/2013 1:49:26 PM PDT by ColdOne
FoxNews.com reporter Jana Winter lost another round in her battle to protect her confidential sources for an exclusive story about Colorado theater shooting suspect James Holmes, when a New York appellate court voted 3-2 to uphold an order for her to appear before a Colorado judge.
The decision Tuesday upheld a lower court's decision to enforce a Colorado subpoena that could force Winter to reveal who told her about a notebook Holmes sent to his psychiatrist or go to jail.
Colorado needs the approval of New York judges to enforce the subpoena.
"We find that the Supreme Court acted properly in directing respondent to appear in the Colorado District Court," read the majority opinion. "Accordingly, the inquiry into admissibility and privilege remains the province of the demanding State rather than the sending State."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
There is no right to privacy
alleged journalists should have no special rights. If they have material evidence in a criminal trial, they should be compelled to produce just as I would be.
The press has the same first amendment rights we do.
If this stands, does that mean the rest of the press will be forced to name all the “unnamed sources” whenever they print an article bashing Republicans?
If it were a NY Slimes writer protecting sources that help that Muslim bastard in the Oval Office, the vote would have been 5-0 in favor of the journalist.
lol.
Shirley ye jest.
Rules applieth not to yon leftists
This is NOT a decision that the reporter has to testify or give up her source. This is a decision that, because the State of Colorado subpoenaed her, she has to go to Colorado. All issues regarding privilege are for the Colorado court to decide.
As I see it....the physciatrist did not fulfill her duty to report the guy with due diligence and I'm betting it's the physciatrist herself.
That's what the judge wants to know, too. Now that Holmes has pled insanity the notebook would not appear relevent. The defense claims whoever in LE told the reporter about the notebook should be open to impeachment because all deny telling her. But now that the plea is insanity, Holmes has admitted to the shooting, so that LE officer may never testify.
So, the privilege issue may never be reached.
So ignore the Demand to Appear or go and assert privelege.
Same ingredients will get the same soup anyway.
“alleged journalists should have no special rights. If they have material evidence in a criminal trial, they should be compelled to produce just as I would be.”
Then we need to revoke the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment. Or just ignore them as is happening.
hussein and his lawyers failed to appear in one of the BC hearings. Nothing happened to them. I’m sure the court won’t care if she doesn’t show up, right?
She should claim they have no standing
the first amendment states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
giving a subpoena to someone working in the press in no way prevents them from publishing whatever they want. This amendment simply states the press shall not have their freedom to publish whatever they want limited and does not give the press special privileges different than any other citizen.
Also, if the journalist wants to take the fifth in court, they are free to do that just as you or I. Again, nothing special about being a member of the press, no special rights.
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.