Reporter sent to jail for refusing to reveal confidential source

**Xiahou** · 07-06-2005, 23:18

Read it here.
I'm not at all convinced that this is a freedom of the press issue as some are arguing. They're still free to report anything they want and its up to them to decide to reveal their sources or not- but that doesn't make them safe from contempt of court sanctions for refusing to testify in a criminal proceeding.

What's really silly to me is that the source has already been revealed to the investigation with his permission- the 2nd reporter is just going to jail on principle. That's fine, but don't expect me to cry for you.

Thoughts?

**PanzerJaeger** · 07-06-2005, 23:34

This will make their careers.. they would like nothing better than to be martyrs for the cause.

I sure hope they dont let them serve their time in connecticut like they are asking.. send them to a real jail and show them the law is the law.

**JimBob** · 07-07-2005, 00:24

The question I ask is why is Novak not going to jail. He is the one who wrote the article that named Plame, which is a felony. These two go to jail for keeping quiet and he stays free for blabbing.

**Tribesman** · 07-07-2005, 01:41

The question I ask is why is Novak not going to jail.
Too right , send him to jail , and if Karl Rove is proven to be the source send him to jail as well .

**Papewaio** · 07-07-2005, 02:21

Is this the start of a whole lot of reporters going to jail or will it be an occasional thing?

Also it seems the source might have been under duress to sign the wavier.

Miller said she refused to reveal her source because she thought the source had been coerced into signing a waiver. Cooper said he was prepared for prison had the source not called him on the phone while he was on his way to the hearing.