----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 1:23 PM
Subject: Re: DOJ jails reporter, Ashcroft allows more journalist subpoenas
> Declan,
>
> The larger problem notwithstanding there's at least one little bit of
> language in this piece that is odd :
>
> "He said the government is
> seeking all of Leggett's
> material, including all
> originals and copies."
>
> Even if we make the extreme assumption that there is some pressing and
> justifiable need for federal prosecutors to have access to her materials
> how do you explain the need to possess "all originals and copies?" It
> doesn't make sense. Why should she not be allowed to keep a copy of her
> work? How does the existence of an uncontrolled copy lower the value of
> the original in the case of a recording? Or in the case of her own notes
> why would a copy not suffice.
>
> Looks like a reporter ( or anyone else for that matter ) should keep
> well hidden backups of their notes and work so that they can comply with
> Napolean complexes, fishing expeditions and spin control operations and
> not lose their life's work.
No. Well hidden backups would put the reporter in a position of contempt,
committing obstruction of justice or perjury. Better to escrow such documents
with an attorney in a jurisdiction not likely to cooperate with the United
States. (I can suggest several to interested parties privately).
