Briefly: The Boston Herald published a series of articles blasting a judge for callousness toward crime victims, using quotes that made him look like a heartless bastard. The story got nationwide play, including an appearance for the reporter involved on The O’Reilly Factor.
Why do I care about this story enough to post it here? Because I make my living proofreading pretrial discovery depositions for court reporters, and read several of the depositions taken in preparing for the trial of this case. They were examinations under oath by the plaintiff’s lawyer of the reporter and his bosses at the newspaper, and of several sources for the libellous articles.
It was damned ugly, what the lawyer found when he turned over those rocks. The more I read, the angrier I got at the callous disregard for accuracy, let alone the immense damage done to the judge and his family by distorted quotes fed to a reporter indifferent to their truth, from a DA’s office out to sabotage a judge they didn’t like.
It’s damned hard to win a libel case. Even harder against a news organization, where actual malice has to be shown, not just negligence. But justice has triumphed and I am GLAD.
And, since this is the Pit, let me add this: Fuck you, Boston Herald, you slime-wallowing bastard child of Rupert Murdoch, you feeble excuse for a newspaper, you make the Weekly World News look like The New York Times.
I just thought I’d add on to this sentence here in your rant…
As a result of this story, people around the country were calling for the judge’s daughters to be raped. As a parent, I can’t imagine what it would be like to hear people foaming with righteous indignation, saying something like that. As a human being, I’m disgusted that anyone would even say such an idiotic and appalling thing.
Unfortunately, odds are that this case will be overturned on appeal. I don’t have the numbers in front of me (and it’s too cold to go get my notebook), but the vast majority of libel cases are overturned on appeal. I’ll post the numbers tomorrow.
Yes, given the tremendously high standard of proof a case like this requires, it’s a tough one to win even at the trial level, let alone on appeal. I’m just hoping it’s egregious enough that the Mass. Appeals Court or Mass. Supreme Judicial Court* will uphold the verdict.
*The appeal will most likely be filed in the Appeals Court, but given the significance of the case I’m betting the senior court will order it transferred to them for decision.
Well, yeh, but that’ll show him, the heartless bastard! :rolleyes:
Oh, and all the news stories say “14-year-old rape victim” but the girl was actually 16. I can’t recall whether it was more nearly a statutory rape case rather than one with violence, as well.
Golly, it’s a good thing that we don’t expect our court reporters and their assistants to, like, keep their mouths shut about things that they learn in the course of their duties.
I suggest you direct your employer’s attention to this thread and ask how she/he feels about your breach of confidentiality.
Everything I’ve written here was testified to during the trial, in far greater detail than the generalities I’ve stated, and is a matter of public record. Nothing I saw in the depositions was discussed with anyone other than the reporter who took the testimony. The trial’s over, the verdict is in. All public record. Or did you not bother to read either of the links I’ve provided?
So take your confidentiality crap and shove it, minty green.
You are an employee or contractor of a public official whose job requires confidentiality and forebearance from public comments on that work. Ask your employer how she feels about you jeopardizing her continued employment. Really. If she says it’s fine for you to blab to the whole world what you thought about the information you learned in the course of editing her transcripts, then by all means, blab away. But she won’t say it’s okay, and neither will the parties, or the judge, or whatever court reporter review board they have in your state.
Hi! Once again, this is public record now. Meaning you yourself could go get the records and post them here if you liked. Having governmental actions be recorded publicly is an important tool of democracy. EddyTeddyFreddy is doing nothing wrong in posting this, and I’m glad she brought the case to my attention, as I hadn’t heard of it before.
ETF, I agree that this should be unimpeachable even upon appeal. Of course I’d though the same thing back in the late 80’s when the Globe lied to help sink Ed King. He won at trial only to have his verdict reversed upon appeal.
I hope that the Herald does get shafted for this - but I’m skeptical.
Generally not, but what I commented on was the evidence presented at trial. I happen to have followed this case closely because of the impression it made upon me while proofing the depositions. But what I read and what I thought about it stayed between me and the reporter who took the testimony. What I’ve expressed here about the defendants’ attitudes and the DA’s office’s involvement is precisely what the plaintiff’s attorney made the heart of his case, both in opening and closing arguments, and in the evidence he presented on direct and cross-examination.
I don’t talk about what I proofread to anyone but the reporter involved. Ever. I see confidential stuff all the time, and it stays confidential. But I’m no soulless robot, and although most of what I read is dull beyond belief,there are cases that move me. Mostly I never do find out what the outcome is. In this case, given its prominence, I did, and was finally able to express the feelings engendered in me by it.
If minty green thinks that’s a censurable breach of confidentiality, tough titties.
Oh, and I forgot to mention that during cross-examination the plaintiff’s lawyer used the pretrial depositions to impeach the testimony of a number of the defendants’ witnesses, including the reporter who wrote the original stories and sources for the stories in the DA’s office. So in fact large swathes of the pretrial discovery are now on the public record.
Large swathes of the pre-trial discovery were also either not offered as evidence in the trial or ruled inadmissible. Hence, your public comments on evidence that was never considered by the jury has a certain possibility of poisoning the well of a new trial. There is, after all, always the possibility of a new trial being ordered by the appellate court. Such things have been known to happen from time to time, you know.
And even if every last word were entered of record in the trial, it is still entirely improper for a court reporter (and, by extension, his or her employees or assistants) to publicly disclose or comment on information obtained in connection with the performance of their duties. Since you don’seem to believe me on that point, I refer you to the National Court Reporters Association’s Code of Professional Ethics, which plainly states that its members shall “Preserve the confidentiality and ensure the security of information, oral or written, entrusted to the Member by any of the parties in a proceeding.”
Now, have you spoken to your court reporter about your public statements yet? Or do you simply prefer to wallow in your reckless ignorance as you risk your employer’s professional livelihood?
Out of curiosity, Minty, is the problem that she’s talking about a case or that she identified which case she was talking about? If it’s the former, there would seem to be a lame double standard at work here…
For god sakes, there’s nothing in her post that wasn’t in public record. It’s interesting that you’re happy to bitch about a court reporter, but you’re saying that you’ve never commented on parts of a case that are public record? I’m dubious.
I am a human services professional, work w/offenders helping them find work. Criminal records are (in my jursidiction) “Public” information, that is, anyone w/ten bucks and the persons name and dob can get all of it, anyone w/the person’s name alone could get much of it.
and my standard is: I will not comment publically about a person that I know through my employment w/sufficient information as to identify the person. I may comment that “I had a client once who robbed a 7 - 11, so drunk he didn’t realize that he knew the clerk” but that’s insufficient info to identify him. I may comment about cases I saw in the paper, read about etc, but they aren’t my clients. If it’s a client of mine, anything I know about them professionally, even if it’s public information is not appropriate to me to blather about it in public (I may, of course discuss a case w/another professional who may be able to help my client etc.). To the extent that a person recently arrived as a client - I had known them before their criminal act, and I cannot comment even to other people in my family who knew they before that criminal act.
it isn’t necessarily a breaking of “public information” as much as a breaking of professional conduct. Specifics I know about a case through my profession are not mine to divulge/comment about as fodder at parties, etc in my social life.