Ethical question

[JayFarrar]

In some of the coverage of the JonBenet case, this line struck me and I was wondering what other people thought.
"Was the principle of finding a killer more important than the privacy of a journalist’s notes and communications?"

By the way, the writer didn't say what he would do.

So let's say you are put in a similar situation. In the process of an interview, the subject admits guilt to a murder.
Would you tell the cops or not tell the cops?
If it went to court, would you give up your notes or not give up your notes?
If faced with the contempt of court charges, would you go to jail to protect someone who admitted to a murder?

 

[Ace]

In some of the coverage of the JonBenet case, this line struck me and I was wondering what other people thought.
"Was the principle of finding a killer more important than the privacy of a journalist’s notes and communications?"

By the way, the writer didn't say what he would do.

So let's say you are put in a similar situation. In the process of an interview, the subject admits guilt to a murder.
Would you tell the cops or not tell the cops?
If it went to court, would you give up your notes or not give up your notes?
If faced with the contempt of court charges, would you go to jail to protect someone who admitted to a murder?

If you are interviewing someone who admits to the murder, why don't you write a story and let the cops take it from there?

 

[JayFarrar]

So would you tell the cops what happened before you wrote the story?
And after it is published and the cops want everything -- notes, recordings -- do you give them to the cops and prosecutors.

 

[Trust NoOne]

If the guys says everything on the record, why not? It's not like you're protecting a source.

Make copies for your files and hand it all over. Otherwise, its obstruction of justice.

 

[User 4332]

You give them nothing. You're not an agent of law enforcement and if you start turning that kind of stuff over then it hampers your ability to do those kinds of stories in the future. They can buy the paper and read what's in there. If the guy confesses to murder, I'd hope you included enough detail in your story that the noose he's trying to hang himself with fits nicely.

They'll want them and they'll try to get them. It's for this reason that many publications have a notes destroying policy -- so that it prevents this kind of fight. They can't get notes that no longer exist.

As for the talking to the cops before hand, here are my thoughts:
If you're a beat reporter that has a good relationship with the cops, you might give them a warning of what's going to be in the paper. You may even need to get some reaction from them. But you'd damn well better time it well enough that they can't start seeking your notes before you publish. You sure as hell don't hand over anything or give them the details of the confession before publication. That's just my $.02 as a former cops reporter.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Couldn't agree more. It's why I was shaky on those MSNBC pedo-stings once they hooked up with the cops.

 

[Overrated]

buckweave and frantic are dead nuts. That's why I destroy all my notes when I'm done. Well, that and it's just a bunch of clutter that takes up room.

 

[Ace]

buckweave and frantic are dead nuts. That's why I destroy all my notes when I'm done. Well, that and it's just a bunch of clutter that takes up room.

In your case, you may want to consider destroying your notes before you start writing.

 

[Overrated]

buckweave and frantic are dead nuts. That's why I destroy all my notes when I'm done. Well, that and it's just a bunch of clutter that takes up room.

In your case, you may want to consider destroying your notes before you start writing.

I don't get it. Why?

 

[Ace]

Because you are overrated. Just funnin' ya.

 

[Overrated]

Touche.

 

[Guerrillascribe]

When I was first starting out, we had the chain's lawyer come by for a refresher on legal issues and I asked him about saving my notes.

He said, bluntly, to destroy them when I was done with the story. Before I could even ask why, he said: "You can't subpoena what doesn't exist."

 

[joe king]

At a paper I used to work at owned by a prominent chain, they had corporate lawyers come through every year or so for what they called ``libel seminars,'' and the first thing they told us every year was to get rid of old notes. Once the story is done, throw them away. That way, you can play the don't remember card if you're ever subpoenaed.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

Most newspapers I've worked for had either a lawyer on retainer or even in-house. This is what we pay them for.

 

[area313code]

Hold up....

You take notes?

 

[PEteacher]

Should be a third option: Destroy the notes, and then cooperate and act sympathetic to police.

 

[Ace]

In some of the coverage of the JonBenet case, this line struck me and I was wondering what other people thought.
"Was the principle of finding a killer more important than the privacy of a journalist’s notes and communications?"

By the way, the writer didn't say what he would do.

So let's say you are put in a similar situation. In the process of an interview, the subject admits guilt to a murder.
Would you tell the cops or not tell the cops?
If it went to court, would you give up your notes or not give up your notes?
If faced with the contempt of court charges, would you go to jail to protect someone who admitted to a murder?

jay - are you the bengals' beat writer?

I don't think so. He'd have this down by now.