(Detroit) Free Press reporter faces contempt hearing for refusing to name sources

[Bozita]

Source: Detroit Free Press

Free Press reporter faces contempt hearing for refusing to name sources
FREE PRESS STAFF • FEBRUARY 11, 2009

Detroit Free Press reporter David Ashenfelter may find out this afternoon if he will face a fine, or even jailing, for refusing a judge’s order to name his sources in a 2004 article about an investigation into a federal prosecutor.

U.S. District Judge Robert Cleland has scheduled a hearing today at 2 p.m. to consider whether to hold Ashenfelter in contempt of court and impose possible sanctions for his refusal to name names.

The hearing pits the interests of journalists in seeking to protect sources when reporting on matters of public interest against the right of individuals to gather crucial evidence in a lawsuit.

Cleland’s ruling – which may or may not come today – is being watched closely by media organizations across the world. It is also being followed by First Amendment advocates who are urging Congress to enact a federal “shield law” that would protect journalists from having to disclose sources in a wide range of legal circumstances.

Read more: http://www.freep.com/article/20090211/NEWS01/90211061/Free+Press+reporter+faces+contempt+hearing+for+refusing+to+name+sources

---

Link will be updated by the Freep.

[pleah]

1. K&R

[Bozita]

2. Update: Judge delays ruling on Free Press reporter who refused to name sources

Judge delays ruling on Free Press reporter who refused to name sources
FREE PRESS STAFF • FEBRUARY 11, 2009

A federal judge just announced that he would not rule today on whether to hold Free Press reporter David Ashenfelter in contempt of court for refusing to identify confidential sources in a 2004 article.

U.S. District Judge Robert Cleland said he would take the contempt issue “under advisement,” which leaves the fate of possible sanctions against Ashenfelter for another day.

Ashenfelter contends, among other things, that being forced to identify who in the U.S. Justice Department told him that a federal prosecutor was under internal investigation would violate Ashenfelter’s rights under the 5th Amendment to avoid self-incrimination. Justice officials who appeared at today’s hearing appeared to bolster Ashenfelter’s argument when they told the judge they could not say, one way or another, if Ashenfelter would face possible criminal charges if he testified.

Today’s hearing is a collision between a journalist’s interest in protecting confidential sources and an individual’s interest in gathering evidence to pursue a lawsuit.

more ...

http://www.freep.com/article/20090211/NEWS01/90211061/Judge+delays+ruling+on+Free+Press+reporter+who+refused+to+name+sources

[burrowowl]

3. Interesting!

[No Elephants]

4. We need a federal shield law for reporters who refuse to name sources, as well as

all-inclusive whistleblower protection.

[sendero]

5. This isn't easy...

... the whistleblower cannot win his case without this guy talking. Journalist or whistleblower, which one is more important. I wouldn't want to have to decide.