San Francisco Chronicle Reporters Sentenced to Prison

11

Reporters Lance Willams and Mark Fainaru-Wada have been sentenced to a maximum of 18 months in prison for refusing to give up their sources in the Barry Bonds/BALCO steroids investigation.

I salute these reporters for upholding the dignity and integrity of journalism. Once a government forces people to give up thier sources whenever they please, freedom of speech no longer exists. Now, this is not an important matter in public welfare, but if they gave up thier sources, it would set up a dangerous precedent. A government that can force people to give up thier sources borders on a dictatorship in terms of the flow of information to its citizens.

As reporters, these two must uphold the confidentiality of their sources. If they gave up the sources, they would be out of work because people would not come to them since they would have no credibility.

I am firmly behind these two reporters for standing up for free speech and journalism itself. The fact that they are going to prison is ridiculous, but I'm happy that these two stood up to the government in this matter.

Source

espn.com
Professor Sid Pactor (University of Florida)

Date

Thu 09/21/06, 5:18 pm EST

Enable Comment Auto-Refresher

Bobbyjim45Draft Pick

1165 days ago

Score 0

Phew, I can sleep easy again now that these guys are off the streets...

Permalink | Reply

Bball3345Draft Pick

1165 days ago

Score 1

It is illegal to hand out sealed testimony. If sealed testimony isn't actually "sealed," then doesn't the court system take a blow. Witnesses won't give up information if they know it won't be kept secret.

Permalink | Reply

ASwaffAll-American

1165 days ago

Score 0

Witnesses won't give up information unless it's sealed, and sources won't give journalists information that serves the public good unless they know they can be protected. It's a dilemma that I don't think reporters should be imprisoned for. There's a rash of instances in this country where people are turning on reporters, and frankly, I think it's digusting. Reporters uncover someone breaking the law, and the only people going to jail are the reporters. What the hell is wrong with this country?

Bball3345Draft Pick

1165 days ago

Score 0

This seems more like opinion than news...

Permalink | Reply

Pack MentalityWaterboy

1165 days ago

Score 0

Next thing you know, they'll be busting people for running sports-betting sites from countries where that's legal. Oh, wait...

Permalink | Reply

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1165 days ago

Score 0

The rules that apply aren't from where you are, it's where you do your business.

Anonymous Fanatic #1

1165 days ago

Score 0

I think it's news. All the points afterwards are straight up facts. reporters in the field aren't ever supposed to reveal sources. that's taboo in the industry. As for them going to jail, I don't see how these two are harmful to society.

Permalink | Reply

Bball3345Draft Pick

1165 days ago

Score 1

"I salute" "I am firmly behind" are not how you state a fact.

Ray agmJV Squad

1165 days ago

Score 2

They deserve some sort of punishment. I think they're scumbags for what they did, regardless of the fact that it was Bonds and they "seeked the truth." They released "secret" testimony and wrote a freakin' book about it! Isn't that profiting off of an illegal action? My question is what happens to their royalties if they've now been convicted of the crime?

Permalink | Reply

J CunninghamVarsity Captain

1165 days ago

Score 1

The reportes never broke any laws; if anyone did, it was their source. The source was the one who leaked the secret grand jury testimony to them; the reporters merely took that information and ran with it, both in the San Francisco Chronicle and in Book of Shadows. The reporters did not break the law.

Ray agmJV Squad

1162 days ago

Score 0

Then by refusing to name their source, aren't they aiding the person who did break the law?

TartanVarsity Captain

1165 days ago

Score 1

I can't disagree more with this opinion. Integrity is not hard to maintain when you already squandered it all publishing secret court documents. Who cares about their jobs, they should have been sentenced longer for the blow they dealt the court system. People will not testify before the grand jury under secrecy if they believe their statements will become public. If this becomes the case, federal convictions will be much harder to come by, with no willing to speak for fear of being outed. Furthermore, it is the government's duty to attempt to find the source of these leaks and to stop the flow of sensitive and sealed information into the wrong and greedy hands of reporters. Try not reading Marriotti and ESPN.com and formulating your own opinions for once.

Permalink | Reply

Ray agmJV Squad

1165 days ago

Score 0

BTW has there been some changes to AGM in regards to how the pages are coded? Site hangs for like 5 seconds on both of my computers when I click on an article. Anybody else having this problem?

Permalink | Reply

Bball3345Draft Pick

1165 days ago

Score 0

yes

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1165 days ago

Score 2

NO NO NO> They MUST go to jail!!! Until they divulge their sources. They need to give back ALL of the money they reaped from the book! They acquired information illegally AND profited heftily from it! You CANNOT defy the only realm of justice we have and BENEFIT from it.

If these jackasses stole TVs and sold them for a profit would that be ok?

They did not steal the info for reasons of "busting Barry Bonds" - if they were about truth and integrity of the story, the book would have been FREE. They purposely wrote the book for ONE MOTIVE ONLY - profit.

They knowingly used testimony that was given in confidence in sealed court documents. The people who revealed the info should be punished HEAVILY. If these douche bags get away with evading the rules established by the grand jury, then investigators have NO power, info will ALWAYS get leaked from now on and we'll never find the truth about anything. This is NOT a Roe v. Wade situation. It's recieving stolen profit with intent to deliver.

It's time to put the boot of the law up some asses. They knew exactly what they were doing. Make them pay.

I'm all for free speech, I'm all for speculation, innuendo and conjecture. I am not for stealing sworn court documents for reason of personal profit. Jerks.

Permalink | Reply

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1165 days ago

Score 1

"dignity and integrity?" These guys are criminals AND pussies.

ASwaffAll-American

1165 days ago

Score 0

Stealing televisions doesn't do anything to bring light to corruption that needs to be fixed. Stealing televisions never served a public good. The two are not comparable.

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1165 days ago

Score 0

Woe woe woe... you can bring light to a situation that needs fixed without breaking the law. Money was the motivator here, not upstanding morals. THEY BROKE THE LAW. (a quite important one, this isn't mattress tag cutting)

ASwaffAll-American

1165 days ago

Score 0

How do you know that money was their motivator? I don't presume to know their motives, and neither should you. It's possible that money was the motivator, but don't assume that's the only possibility. As for breaking the law, uncovering corruption isn't always that cut and dry. Sometimes people illegally obtain information in order to bring to light certain wrong doings. Why do you think they have whistle blower protections?

Ray agmJV Squad

1165 days ago

Score 1

Read a SFchronicle.com article about it and in defending themsevles, these guys have the gall to bring up young men who have committed suicide after taking steroids and claimed they were doing it as a "public service." http://sfgat...MTLANJR1.DTL

Permalink | Reply

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1165 days ago

Score 0

You don't PROFIT from illegally acquired material for public service.

Bball3345Draft Pick

1165 days ago

Score 0

maybe they should have thought of the DISservice they were doing to OUR COUNTRY when they undermined the court system.

ASwaffAll-American

1165 days ago

Score 0

How did they undermine our court system? People keep making that claim without backing it up. Secret testimony has been divulged for years. Remember all the information that got leaked from the Clinton investigation by Kenn Starr? Secret testimony has been leaked for ages, but people keep testifying. I don't think this hurts our judicial system, and I think the people making that argument are walking on thin legal ice trying to destroy reporters.

Manny StilesMajor Leaguer

1165 days ago

Score 0

it's one thing to leak it, it's another to PROFIT directly from it. They could have wrote their books with the EXACT same info they had and not mentioned that they got it from sworn testimony, just say it as conjecture... but that wouldn't sell the books, would it?

The thing is, now Bonds won't have that testimony used against him because it WAS leaked. They gave Bonds an out...

Hey, they had a chance to divulge their "source", they didn't do it and now they'll pay the punishment.

I personally believe THEY were the source, which is why they named no one. They would have been doing 3-5+ if they said tehy did it... these guys got away with a no-no.

TartanVarsity Captain

1165 days ago

Score 0

You have no idea how much secret testimony has been leaked for ages. Your one example happened less than a decade ago, doesn't sound like ages to me. Its secret for a reason, people aren't supposed to know about it, and shouldn't know about it. How else do you think the government is able to bring indictments against high-powered criminals, past and present?

ASwaffAll-American

1165 days ago

Score 0

No, conjecture DOES sell books. What conjecture doesn't do is carry the weight of sworn testimony. Anyone can conjecture anything they want, and it doesn't necessarily mean anything. Sworn testimony actually has some weight and validity. And Tartan, it was just one example. Just because I only gave one example doesn't mean there IS only one example.

DennisODellTee-Baller

1164 days ago

Score 0

Look, the Supreme Court already has case law precedent in this. So, all the whining in the world won't change the fact the judge made the correct ruling. http://casel...mp;invol=665

Permalink | Reply

Retrieved from "http://armchairgm.wikia.com/San_Francisco_Chronicle_Reporters_Sentenced_to_Prison"

This page was last modified 17:09, 22 September 2006. Content is available under the GFDL.