Paul Quinn has a story up about the Scruggs case, which can be found here. He has a longer version of the story here, following a link to the motion I mentioned in my prior post.
Update: Second link fixed.
2nd Update: Patsy Brumfield has a brief story up about the motion, along with a promise of more details in the Friday paper, and a pdf of the motion itself, all here.
Patsy Brumfield too, with attached pdf of the motion (h/t Kycol).
Since the motion was meant to be sealed, the Eagle won’t be running the .pdf nor getting into exact details of the investigation or his health issues. New is news but, we don’t like to burn bridges, hurt investigations, and we do try to respect the court. Basically, the same reasons NMC took down his posts on the matter.
PS. Our very own NMC will be quoted in today’s Eagle as welll!
PSS. I’m not making any suggestions on other papers that chose to do differently. Just explaining things. And this is a decision of the higher-ups. We are running a story, it’s not in great detail.
Lydialaw: The cats already out of the bag. Half of those interested read the PDF yesterday. Seems logical that the other half now have the same opportunity. Thus the DJ posting of the PDF.
And that’s the right of the DJ and whomever else to decide.
It’s an ethics question really and I don’t get paid the big bucks to decide those. I do support their decision though. But it’s an interesting one I’d love to hear other opinions about from our attorneys and journalist who read this blog.
The health issue was not why the government was asking for the downward departure. To me, that’s not really the issue. In fact, it’s not really new news at all. His plea agreement signed in January already had the 36-month cap. What this motion does, more than anything, shows they are moving along in the case. The health issues and the intruder happened after the plea was already made.
The only real reason they asked for the downward move was due to his cooperation, which everyone knew he was doing. This motion is almost housekeeping. The plea said they would ask for a downward departure and this is the government “asking.” Which means, I suspect, we will see a sentencing date soon.
good for you lydia.
Lydialaw: I agree with everything you said. I was/am advocating the practicality of the issue in that it is a secret to some and not others, based on the punctuality of their viewing.
AP has it now.
Here’s the Eagle story.
I would like to see actual prosecutions take place based upon that alleged cooperation, and continued cooperation by testifying at those trials, BEFORE he is given any leniency in sentencing. Sounds like they are putting the cart before the horse to me.
IF he gets leniency in his sentencing and thereafter sentenced BEFORE any prosecutions based upon the information provided, and those future prosecutions never happen due to politics, what exactly has been accomplished from Langston’s information?
I’m still skeptical of the whole thing, and won’t feel good about it until I see some indictments and arrests.
His health issues could potentially affect his availability for later trials. Time may be of the essence.
Ethics in journalism? Is there a code of ethics written down anywhere? Can someone provide a link to any such code? I would be interested in reading that.
It can’t be good for Dickie that the US references a “Scruggs I” and “Scruggs II”.
AFOTL, my sister, a very accomplished journalist had said to me that there’s not.
AFOTL @ 11: Journalism’s code of ethics is on the shelf next to Great Britain’s constitution.
And Ben, that same shelf has some other interesting titles: “Conventional Wisdom” being first and foremost among them, followed closely by “Family Values” and “God’s Work”. And right behind them, “Kosher” and “Decorum.”
Also, Ben, when I went to work as a wet-behind-the-ears young lawyer for a firm that represented a newspaper, our senior partner called me into his office on the eve of my first trial defending our publishing client and reminded me that “[t]here are three professions that require no prior training, no experience, no credentials of any kind, and no license before embarking upon them: journalism, prostitution, and that particular branch of the ministry that is occupied by those who deem themselves to be self-ordained preachers.”
For an industry everyone here says has no ethics, we seem to talk about ethics a lot. Not that that means anything.
Well, dmwriter, speaking of ethics, can you tell us why journalists appear to have “bought in” to the notion that P.L. Blake and Trent Lott are off limits? Tell me it has nothing to do with publishers overriding reporters!
I don’t think they are, but one thing we must have is a source to attribute ideas to. Unless somthing more concrete comes to light… our job is to report the facts. Do you know anyone who’ll go on record about it? Till then we’re stuck reporting the facts. But I can only speak on working for a college paper, so I am not sure how pro news services handle it.
Along those lines, I’m still wondering why there has been no investigative reporting by any gutsy journalists out there about many of the potential peripheral issues raised during “Scruggs I”. There appears to me to be a lot of potential great stories about likely shenanigans during the tobacco litigation, as well as the asbestos litigation. No one in the media seems to be interested enough to really dig and investigate, even with such a potential target rich environment that includes big dogs of all political stripes. $$$ corruption has no party affiliation —-its a destination with an equal opportunity road.
But, likely, such investigative reporting is lacking on the above topics for the same reason we will have NO real investigation (by Congress or the news media) of the recent financial crisis.
And the same reason there was no real hard hitting investigation by the news media (or any govt. prosecution) of the past Global Crossing debacle (when it involved as much or more book cooking and crooked dealings than the Enron and Worldcom scandals, and was certainly just as big or bigger moneywise).
Too many big dogs on both sides of the aisle involved in all of these matters. Whose goose is getting cooked seems to trump any “ethics” in journalism and news reporting these days. IF you can’t get the “right” folks, then why bother.
3rddsouth:
I think P.L. Blake and Trent Lott are different problems.
P.L. Blake is a story that is invisible to any public record. It’s the kind of story a reporter is least able to cover. Charlie Merkel, an agressive lawyer with access to subpoenas, who was chasing Scruggs like Ahab and the whale, never really got to the bottom of P.L. Blake.
Lott– there may have been some similarities in that some of the story was “off stage” without public sources. And an asst US Atty effectively vouched for him, saying he was only a witness (I’ve never bought that).
The bottom line may be the same about both. Calvin Trillin noted that one of the sources of reporter’s facinations with trials is that witnesses don’t get to say “no comment.” The subpoena power is kindred.
AFOTL wrote: “why there has been no investigative reporting by any gutsy journalists”.
The media outlets in MS are barely able to afford keeping up with daily news. If there are any reporters whose job is long term investigative reporting of the deep long term sort, I don’t know them. I really think the problem is lack of $s to do the work, and nothing more. Seriously.
I second nmc’s post. There isn’t a paper hurting right now. Ad sales are down and it cost nearly twice as much as it used to to print. But I do think Wilkie’s book will shed a differnt light not yet published. We just have to wait a few years.
I’m buying your first two sentences but not your last sentence dmwriter.
I have high hopes nmc. We shall see.
On another point, I’ve been pondering all day what people mentioned in the motion or thinking tonight. Now that would be a good interview.
Editors note on last post: All papers are hurting.
NMC, if just a handful would descend upon these topics with the same gusto with which they invaded Alaska in search of Sarah Palin dirt, or the same enthusiasm to destroy John Edwards in that soap opera like mini-drama, there would be some folks out there sweating bullets. I don’t think its just a lack of money. Its at least in part due to a lack of priorities when the wrong ox is to be gored.
And speaking of Merkle and PL, from my reading of those old transcripts from the depositions of PL and Scruggs ( re PL), the questions posed and leads not followed when they were under oath was a bit disappointing to me from such an experienced attorney. I recall thinking: ” is that it? you’re gonna let them get away with those lame ass vague answers without further challenge or digging”??
AFOTL, part of what you describe in your first para is the difference between a national political story and other types of stories. Business or local stories (this is a bit of each) are not really pursued with big recources. But also– those stories were easy compared to this one.
2nd para: I have a slightly less jaundiced view of what Merkel was up to than you do. Part of it is that in a large sense the things I’m wondering about are secondary to what Merkel was chasing. Unless the criminal trial goes all the way back (I have reasons to doubt it will), I think what Merkel did will be the most we’ll ever know about mcuh of that. Next time I go through those transcripts I’ll think about loose ends not pursued rather than just trying to figure out what happened.
I suppose the same could be said about any job,ThirdSouth. But just because you have a degree or a license to do something, doesn’t mean you’re very good at it. What do you call a doctor who graduated at the bottom of his class?….Doctor.
There may not be an ethics code “written down” somewhere for journalists, doesn’t mean individual journalists can’t have their own “ethics codes.”
Which means those journalist won’t run rumors, or random comments from non-named sources. They won’t slaughter a person’s career based on the fact their name is well known and was mentioned in a investigation without some serious facts to back it up. They won’t run the names of victims, no matter how “juicy” the story behind the name may be. They rely on facts and do their darndest to remain unbiased.
Just as lawyers, doctors, etc. have “specialties” so do journalists. Some, very few these days, are investigative reporters who have 3 months to work on one story.
Others, have an hour to write 2 or 3 before deadline to fill the paper on a daily basis, all the while, trying to make sure they are correct and as informative as possible.
That doesn’t make that reporter less gutsy – they are doing their job. They are doing what is expected of them by their employer (who pays their wage) and faulting them for doing less, would be like criticising a civil attorney for not taking on a criminal case.
Well, Lydia, it’s the desire to keep one’s law license, once obtained, that prevents publishing a document that should have been sealed, but wasn’t. No journalist without a law license should ever feel so constrained. And insofar as journalistic ethics goes, “juicy” was never an issue I intended to raise — wealthy publishers not allowing their low-pay reporters to cover persons or events, like not allowing them to write headlines, was.