ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Constitutional Law Blogs -> First Amendment Center

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Constitutional Law

: First Amendment Center

TV station appeals judge's order blocking broadcast of video

By By The Associated Press

ADVERTISEMENTS

JACKSON, Miss. ? A Hattiesburg television station has asked the Mississippi Supreme Court to allow it to broadcast video it acquired of alleged abuse at the Forrest County Juvenile Detention Center.

Forrest County Youth Court Judge Mike McPhail last week barred WDAM from showing the video. McPhail ruled that WDAM failed to provide evidence of a need in showing the video.

The Supreme Court had not ruled as of Jan. 14 on the petition or set a hearing date.

Leonard Van Slyke, a First Amendment attorney representing WDAM, said on Jan. 14 that a supportive brief was being prepared and numerous national media organizations ? including the Associated Press ? had agreed to sign on to it.

WDAM has reported that a former employee of the detention center said the video shows alleged abuse of juveniles at the hands of guards. The station has reported that the sheriff's office confirms one guard was fired in 2009 for beating a juvenile, but so far no charges have been filed.

Van Slyke said that WDAM, in its petition filed on Jan. 13, argued that McPhail's order was an "unconstitutional prior restraint" on its ability to "publish truthful information of public significance."

The station said that neither the youth court nor the state had shown any reason to control WDAM's use of the video.

Van Slyke earlier said that the tapes were a matter of public interest and that the station had a First Amendment right to air them.

McPhail had said the video would jeopardize juvenile privacy, while Van Slyke said privacy would be protected.

The petition states that WDAM had agreed to not disclose the identities of the juveniles involved and to "blur" the faces of the juveniles in the video to protect their identities.

Full post as published by First Amendment Center on January 17, 2011 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0132 secs (new cache)