When thinking of the First Amendment I think about the little guy standing up to the "man" (e.g., the Government). Specifically, I think about the right of a little guy to take an unpopular public stand in the face of potential punishment or prior restraint. I don't readily think about a newspaper photographer's right to keep his or her unpublished photos private when doing so serves no important purpose or interest. This is why it is so hard for me to appreciate why the Daily Sound publisher, Jeramy Gordon, is putting up such a fuss about the fact that Deputy Public Defender Karen Atkins, of the Santa Barbara Public Defender's Office, wants to view photos which are material, and potentially very useful, in defense of her client who stands accused of homicide.
“The reason I’m standing my ground on this,” Sound publisher Gordon said, “is because I believe reporters and photographers are neutral observers protected by the First Amendment, they are not supposed to be an arm of the police, the District Attorney, or the Public Defender.” http://www.independent.com/news/2007/aug/02/emdaily-soundem-ordered-surrender-photos/
What important interest is Gordon really trying to protect here? And whatever the real or imagined interest, could that interest be more powerful than the right of the "little guy" to defend himself against the Government? While Ms. Atkins delivers herself as a powerful member of Government, in reality she is rather powerless in as much she is a mere advocate for an indigent teenager charged with murder. It is absurd for Mr. Gordon to be styling himself the victim of an overbearing Government when it is a teenager accused of murder - and not the Government - who is putting a demand on him. The only victim possible, it seems to me, would be the accused, if indeed the Santa Barbara Superior Court were to have followed along any further with this irritating assertion of First Amendment privilege by Gordon. The Court made the right call.
A Santa Barbara criminal defense lawyer's commentary on the criminal law, the criminal justice system, Isla Vista, DUI, and a variety of related topics.
Showing posts with label Independent. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Independent. Show all posts
Thursday, August 2, 2007
No Anti-Gang Injunctions in Santa Barbara - Ever
Santa Barbara Police Chief Cam Sanchez stated, emphatically, to Martha Sadler of the Independent that he will not support an injunction against Gangs in Santa Barbara as long as he is chief of police. http://www.independent.com/news/2007/aug/02/police-chief-cam-sanchez-explains-laws-view-gangs/ This is a departure from the standard no-holds-barred all out "war on crime" approach to the complex problem of street-gangs. I applaud Chief Sanchez for, apparently, taking civil liberties into account in his analysis; especially when, as he points out, injunctions are ineffective.
Labels:
Cam Sanchez,
Gangs,
Independent,
Injuctions,
Police
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)