Jailed Blogger Could Spend a Year in Detention
EmailA federal appeals court has refused to hear the case of blogger and freelance journalist, Josh Wolf, who now could end up spending almost a year in prison for his refusal to turn over unedited video of a San Francisco protest he filmed over a year ago. Wolf posted footage of the 2005 violent protest on his blog, which was picked up by local and national media. During the filmed incident, a police car was vandalized. Though Wolf denies he filmed the actual attack on the police car, in September a federal judge ordered him to testify and turn over all of the footage, which he refused. According to the new ruling, if he doesn’t turn over the footage and his sources, he will remain in custody until July 2007, when the grand jury expires. Lucie Morillon of Reporters Without Borders calls the federal appeals court decision "absurd." "Josh Wolf is about to set a precedent as the longest reporter held in the United States for refusing to disclose his sources," Says Morillon. "He’s not a criminal; he was just protecting his sources which is something many journalists have to do." Dave Heller of the Media Law Resource Center, a legal organization specializing in First Amendment rights, says the burden should fall on the government to prove that a journalist’s materials are absolutely needed for a case. He says Wolfe’s jailing is especially troubling. "The request for information to get his tapes does seem to be somewhat removed from the focus of the investigation, or at least nothing essential to it," says Heller. "In that setting, it’s troublesome that the consequence for not cooperating is to be thrown into jail for a lengthy period of time." A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California, who prosecuted the case against Wolf, says, "The incident is under investigation so that the grand jury can determine what, if any, crimes were committed," and, "This office did not initiate a federal investigation in order to circumvent the California State Shield Law." Morillon says jailing journalists for protecting sources is becoming a "chilling trend" in the United States. "More and more journalists are being subpoenaed by federal courts; they are being forced to reveal their sources," she says. "If confidentiality of sources can’t be granted, where is journalism going to go?" Last month in the annual ranking of press freedom by Reporters Without Borders, the United States dropped nine places to number 53, in line with such countries as Botswana, Croatia and Tonga.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Mr Wolf is a hero. #43 gang are criminals for creating the environment in the country where exposing corruption is considered bad for society. Imagine if this continues what sort of present we will live in.
Posted by: Sadman | November 18, 2006, 8:31 am 8:31 am
American journalism has always been a vanguard of the innocent and a threat of exposure to the guilty. Confidentiality of sources must be protected for the good of the people and the detriment of those that have reason to fear exposure of the truth!
Posted by: Donald R. | November 18, 2006, 1:24 pm 1:24 pm
We are talking about a Grand Jury here. Remember, the Grand Jury proceedings are secret and there is no “exclusionary rule” to ensure all searches and seizures abide by Amendment IV. The Grand Jury’s proceedings are kept secret to prevent bias in the eventual trial (if the Grand Jury hands down an Indictment). The judge is partially correct: the man can be compelled to testify and turn over his video so long as there is no risk to self-incrimination. However, naming his sources is inappropriate and he must have immunity from prosecution under the First Amendment. Imagine if Woodward or Bernstein were jailed in the 1970′s for refusing to give up Mark Felt as Deep Throat? As the Supreme Court opined in New York Times v. United States, a free press is immune from any prosecution for anything it prints, so long as that information does not cause immediate damage to life or limb and the information is not libel.
With respect to this article, there are quite a few grammatical and spelling errors. Please correct them.
Posted by: Andrew Elgert | November 18, 2006, 5:56 pm 5:56 pm
This isnt about freedom of the press this is about a filthy rotten Leftist media Punk. witholding evidence of a Criminal felony beating of a Law enforcement officer.
ABC and every scumbag in this story is a seditious RAT.
Posted by: Steve Reshakis | November 18, 2006, 8:17 pm 8:17 pm
Everyone calls this guy a journalist, but all I can find are articles written about him, not by him. And of course his one video. Some body of work.
And who are these sources he is protecting? What is he protecting them from? Woodward and Bernstein had a source to protect, a source that had inside information about a crime. I have no idea what Josh Wolf is hiding.
Also missing from the article is the little annoying fact that a police officer suffered a fractured skull at the hands of one of the protesters. The FBI is hoping Wolf’s video tape may give them a lead on the person who smacked him with a pipe. Perhaps that person is a friend of Josh Wolf, and that is who he is protecting.
That does not fall under the protection of a journalists rights. That would be aiding and abetting after the fact.
Posted by: MagicalPat | November 19, 2006, 10:16 am 10:16 am
quote:
What “source” is being protected here? This kid took the video himself.
Moreover, Josh Wolf is not a journalist. He is a lunatic leftwing blogger.
Wolf posted some home videos about a leftwing riot he attended on his blog site. His footage captured the brutal, near-fatal beating of a policeman. Not just the “vandalizing of a police car” as the article claims.
/quote
Posted by: concerned | November 19, 2006, 11:14 am 11:14 am
You will fool some people into thinking this guy is a hero, but you only lose credibility with the ones that know the truth.
Does ABC even care about the truth?
Posted by: concerned | November 19, 2006, 11:16 am 11:16 am
Get off of it folks. Everybody who does not worship Bush is not committing sedition or treason. You people learned nothing from the last election.
Posted by: W.D.Russell | November 20, 2006, 7:21 am 7:21 am
He’s one of three bazillion bloggers so who cares. I mean, can anyone nowadays pay a few bucks a month to maintain a blog, publish anything they want, and then claim freedom of the press?
I can understand how we needed to Free Willie, Free Tibet, and Free Mason, but this is taking things to the extreme.
Posted by: gus | November 20, 2006, 9:56 am 9:56 am
This guy should be jailed for years not a year. What scum bag, films the beating of a cop and then helps his nutcase friends get away with it. DISGUSTING. This isn’t about politics left or right. This is about a group of out of control kids attacking a police officer and severly beating him, because he represents authority and he was outnumbered. This punk kid blogger is not a journalist nor a decent human being. ANYONE who can stand by and watch something like this let alone have evidence which can help catch those who commited it, is not worth a damn.
Posted by: Hockeyguy | November 20, 2006, 2:27 pm 2:27 pm
I think its great put more reporters in jail, they are just as much the enemy as Al Qaeda. You cannot pick and choose the laws you want to obey. Most reports are spoiled rich white kids or maybe he could join the ARMY and go to IRAQ.
John Whitaker
Posted by: John Whitaker | November 20, 2006, 9:52 pm 9:52 pm
This guy is an extreme leftist and anarchist. You would know this he visited his sight. What source is he protecting, himself? He did the filming. He filmed an assault but refuses to come foward because it was law enforcement that got attacked. If it was the other way around he would turn it over in a heart beat or demand that the filmer turn it over.
Posted by: ousslander | November 21, 2006, 9:28 am 9:28 am
The guys is a bumb. Give up the film or “book’em Daniel”
Posted by: David | November 21, 2006, 11:05 am 11:05 am
With all the lies and failure to report real news instead of the “NEW” journalist idea that they are part of the news, I don’t care what happens to him. When the journalist go back to reporting news instead of editting it to promote thier own ideas I will once again support them and thier desire to dig up the truth for all not just against those they harbor some foolish distaste for.
Posted by: rick | November 21, 2006, 7:49 pm 7:49 pm
He isn’t protecting a source of reliable information.
He is withholding a video of something that took place outside, in the public view. If Josh Wolf (or his friends) had nothing to do with this violent crime, then Josh need not fear anything. He should hand over the video.
The truth shall set you free, Josh.
Posted by: bonhoffer | November 21, 2006, 8:01 pm 8:01 pm
I have been a victim of these so called heros of the press.They are not heros,they make up lies if they can’t find or decide not to work to report a story.They will just make one up.The classic is we tried to contact the other person to get their side of the story.Sniff Sniff Bullshiit!!!AMERICA needs to hold the Press accountable for breaking laws and ruining peoples lives based on lies,or covering for their partners in crime commiting the REAL CRIMES..=) I was vindicated(NOT by the press) but not evryone is as lucky as me….
Posted by: Kevin Stupid | November 21, 2006, 9:50 pm 9:50 pm
Before we become Cuba, N.Korea, or the old Soviet Union, we had better wake up to the fact that these small changes in the law that result in less and less liberty are starting to add up.
We better realize that eventually, we won’t be very free if we continue on this road.
We must peacefully protest against such laws, or we are doomed to live in a marxist state.
Posted by: Mark Williams | November 22, 2006, 12:45 am 12:45 am
Josh could well be protecting a source, but I agree strongly he should be afforded specific protections for any cooperation he provides. He deserves representation from a decent attorney.
This reminds me of a scummy situation that occured late 2004/early 2005 in Peoria, IL. An off-duty soldier who spend time in Iraq was back home. He was filming a local basketball game when a fight broke out. He kept filming despite an officer telling him to cease. The city’s police chief (who didn’t identify himself) reportedly took the man into custody and confiscated his video to use against him. Their newspaper wouldn’t even allow me to comment on it – citing that only paid subscribers could do so. So much for public service from the press huh?
Posted by: Herry Kerry | November 22, 2006, 6:49 am 6:49 am
Imagine the leftist outcry if the video showed a black man being beated by a bunch of cops instead of a cop being beaten by black men.
Imagine the court wanted to find evidence of a police department run amuck.
Would lefties then call some local redneck hick blogger a “fearless avenger of press freedom” and noble champion of the first amendment”?
As an aside, I looked like crazy for the Reporters Immunity Amendment in the Bill of Rights, but I just couldn’t find it.
Posted by: Big Bill | November 22, 2006, 6:57 am 6:57 am
well Dana, looks like the people have spoken. The most compelling argument is the hypocrisy angle (since hypocrisy is THE mortal sin of progressivism – rich in irony, that). Imagine if someone had tape of an anarchist brat being abused. The wailing from the left would be deafening if it was withheld. Lawsuits? You bet. If that tape-holding someone was the authorities, ABC would probably join in the suit, no?
Posted by: rhodeymark | November 22, 2006, 7:50 am 7:50 am
Grammar and spelling errors do not matter to people today. It is just more evidence of how undisciplined and sloppy many people are in their writing.
Posted by: Mike | November 22, 2006, 8:08 am 8:08 am
“can anyone nowadays pay a few bucks a month to maintain a blog, publish anything they want, and then claim freedom of the press?”
YES
Until they outlaw the 1st Amendment.
Posted by: Blue Mark | November 22, 2006, 6:05 pm 6:05 pm
“can anyone nowadays pay a few bucks a month to maintain a blog, publish anything they want, and then claim freedom of the press?”
Wow… that really tells me how little some people know about the U.S.A. This is what we call the 1st Amendment, as noted above. It is what all journalism in our country rests upon.
Do you think a magic force created our large (credible) news organizations? A person’s sense of fairness and journalistic integrity , not their medium of choice matters when discussing their credibility. This is equally as crucial and applicable for those journalists that work with multi-million dollar budgets as it is for those that work with hundred-dollar budgets. Anyone and everyone starts somewhere, but it’s all based on the same principles.
Posted by: james | November 22, 2006, 8:38 pm 8:38 pm
what is the big deal here, the idiot was ordered to turn over the original tape, not his source. Make a copy of the tape, give it to the courts. This man is aiding a criminal by not providing the information. There is a huge difference between freedom of the press and what the hacks today are putting out as “news”. It is sad that the MSM only wants to feed the public their biassed views as news, while doing what they can to hide the truth.
Posted by: repoman | November 27, 2006, 2:47 pm 2:47 pm
Great grammar:
“Josh Wolf is about to set a precedent as the longest reporter held in the United States for refusing to disclose his sources,”
How about:
“Josh Wolf is about to set a precedent as the reporter held longest in the United States for refusing to disclose his sources,”
I know it’s picky, but you guys are Supposed to me literate writers, right?
Posted by: Mark | November 27, 2006, 4:53 pm 4:53 pm
It generally escapes mention in cases like this, but the Constitution and the 1st Amendment have no provision for a reporter being able to refuse to comply with court orders. “Protecting the source” is a figment of the imagination as far as law is concerned. If a reporter chooses to do so, it is entirely at his or her own risk of the consequences.
Posted by: Geezer | November 27, 2006, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm
Why are some people turning this into an excuse for liberal-bashing? Or media bashing? Conservative journalists want the same rights as all the others. As Geezer and others have pointed out, the “right” to “confidentiality of sources” DOES NOT EXIST as such; Wolf remains in violation of a court order and he’s still in jail. SO HE’S NOT GETTING AWAY WITH ANYTHING HERE.
Personally, I agree that Wolf has an obligation to cooperate with the criminal investigation. If he has information that could be used as evidence of a violent crime, he would need a very, very good reason to justify holding it back. And he would have to be prepared to pay the price. On the other hand, it’s not fair to assume that Wolf is already covering up the crime – in the article he denies he filmed the actual attack on the police car
Posted by: Jed Weber | November 28, 2006, 1:58 am 1:58 am
Free speech, freedom of expression, freedom of the press only belongs in a true democracy!
If someone can categorically state that they had the same viewpoint as the cameraman then they have an eye witness!
Perhaps there were other covert activities being enacted that the state wants to ensure remain secret – like possibly recognizable state interference.
Posted by: Jim McCracken | November 28, 2006, 7:47 am 7:47 am
I agree with the majority here. This person is another socialist punk. The USA is in the shape it is because we have allowed too much liberalism and “freedom” to the point that laws can’t be inforced without violating some freak’s civil rights. Teacher’s can’t teach, Policemen can’t Police. Our country is going to hell in a handbasket and it’s our own damn fault.
Posted by: mike | November 28, 2006, 10:29 am 10:29 am
I thought the article said that the video was posted on his website. why do they need the original?
and to mike:
too much liberalism is not at fault for the current state of of the united states. policeman police and teachers teach, they probably just don’t do it the way you’d like them to, and that’s your opinion.
I think our country is also kind of in decline but not because of “too much liberalism”, I argue it’s a mixture of liberalism and conservatism.
I’m sorry that you can only think in black and white. if our country has been going down after 6 yeards of republican rule in both national and state politics, that speaks volumes I’d say.
Posted by: matt | December 17, 2006, 3:48 pm 3:48 pm
TASERING IS A CRIME……
In such instances, AI reported in 2004, that the force used by Police Officers “VIOLATES” International Standards prohibiting cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, as well as International guidelines on police use of force.
A medical expert has informed AFP (American Free Press) that Taser energy can cause heart attacks, blood clots, and long term damage to vital organs.
Officers of the Peoria Police Department are unlawfully Tasering individual that have already been handcuffed.
Amnesty International recently reiterated its concerns about the use of the Taser Stun Gun on individuals who have already been handcuffed of placed in mechanical restraints.
Latoshia Fisher
Posted by: Latoshia Fisher | August 29, 2008, 5:34 pm 5:34 pm