By Carlos Miller
U.S. District Judge Arthur Spatt has absolutely no clue how the news industry works. And he has no clue how the First Amendment works.
The federal judge found it “troubling” that Newsday published photos of New York legislator Roger Corbin being led away in handcuffs after he was arrested on tax evasion charges earlier this month.
Spatt believes Newsday should have used other photos taken throughout Corbin’s long legislative career.
The judge now wants to hold a hearing to determine whether Newsday and News12 should be barred from continuing to publish or broadcast these photos because he believes they may hinder Corbin’s chances for a fair trial.
Spatt, you are an idiot.
First of all, Corbin, a democrat, is not only charged with evading $226,000 in taxes, but also with lying to an agent about it.
Second of all, as stated by Newsday attorney David Schulz, “never in U.S. history has the U.S. Supreme Court or the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals allowed a judge to restrain news organizations before publication.”
“Courts do not get [into] telling the media what to publish,” Schulz said
Via The Agitator
Popularity: 1% [?]
12 responses so far ↓
1 xdamousex // May 21, 2009 at 12:34 PM
You would think that, as a judge, he would know better.
2 Kol. Klink // May 21, 2009 at 3:18 PM
Spatt and Corbin are the Only Ones photogenic enough.
The little people should never see the Only Ones in cuffs. That humiliation is reserved for lower beings.
Now, the Only Ones will be on the prowl to payback the a mainstream newspaper for their impudence.
Yeah, sorry, but the newspaper’s building is blighted, and the Spatt & Associates Hotel offers more tax revenues to the Only Ones that can spend your money wisely enough.
3 Eric Ogunbase // May 21, 2009 at 4:00 PM
The proles should NEVER see members of the Inner Party in handcuffs!
4 Pinandpuller // May 22, 2009 at 1:11 AM
Note to high class lawbreakers: Get head-shots.
Why didn’t Spitzer get this same treatment for crying out loud?
5 diomedesxx // May 23, 2009 at 4:26 PM
It is “troubling” that a news agency would take pictures at a government-sanctioned indirect association of guilt and humiliation walk all rolled into one? Oye, I think the judge is shooting off at the wrong party here. If the picture conveys a bias of guilt to the accused, the judge needs to get the people performing it (heh, the government) to stop the practice, not tell the spectators to stop documenting it.
6 Kol. Klink // May 23, 2009 at 5:49 PM
Police won’t release arrest record in alleged brutality case
May 15, 2009 – 3:49 PM
DANIEL CHACÓN
THE GAZETTE
The Colorado Springs Police Department is refusing to release the arrest report of a man who claims he was punched by a decorated policeman after he filmed officers kicking another man.
Earlier this month, The Gazette uncovered a federal civil rights lawsuit filed against the city and Officer Peter Tomitsch by Marc Johnson, a Colorado Springs man who claims he was the victim of police brutality.
Johnson was arrested for resisting arrest in the October 2008 incident.
When The Gazette asked the Police Department for a copy of Johnson’s arrest report, Lt. David Whitlock, a police spokesman, told a reporter to file a request under the Colorado Open Records Act.
The request was filed May 7.
Agencies can take up to three days to respond to such a request.
On Tuesday, Whitlock said in an e-mail that the City Attorney’s Office was “still evaluating certain legal questions concerning the CORA request” and that an answer was forthcoming.
At 3:05 p.m. today, Whitlock said the request had been denied.
“Based on our research associated with your request, the CSPD has determined to not release any reports related to the Oct. 8, 2008, arrest of Marc Johnson,” Whitlock said in an e-mail.
“We have determined this based on a balancing test coupled with the ongoing investigation and adjudication of a separate defendant from the same criminal incident,” he said “We will re-do the balancing test when the case is concluded, based on whatever information is available at that time.”
Kevin Flesch, Johnson’s Englewood-based attorney, said last week that his client had been charged with resisting arrest and possibly obstruction. He also said the charges against Johnson “eventually got resolved.”
Flesch said he would “love” to share a copy of the video, which purportedly shows officers beating up another man near a car dealership on North Academy Boulevard. But he said his client had not authorized him to release it.
Since then, Flesch has not returned messages requesting a copy of the video.
http://www.gazette.com/common/printer/view.php?db=colgazette&id=54114
7 xdamousex // May 24, 2009 at 2:46 AM
Johnson was arrested for resisting arrest in the October 2008 incident.
That is absolutely priceless.
8 xdamousex // May 24, 2009 at 2:51 AM
What’s even sadder than that is the fact that googling “was arrested for resisting arrest” IN QUOTES gets 1,130 results.
What a country.
9 Pinandpuller // May 24, 2009 at 4:17 AM
Well here’s one that combines filming the police with that crazy Johnny Z we all love:
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=99005
10 Vidiot // May 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM
Someone needs to Google “prior restraint.”
11 bob nonynonynonyaww // Jun 7, 2009 at 8:04 AM
Hows about a picture of the judge?
12 Anonymoose // Aug 23, 2009 at 3:37 PM
What do you say to a dumb lawyer?
Good morning your honor.
Leave a Comment