Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
del.icio.us.
Digg!
furl
google
newsvine
reddit
technorati
Facebook
Yahoo!
Paul Wellman
Detained youths
In an expected move by Santa Barbara Superior Court Judge Brian Hill, the Santa Barbara Independent and the newspaper's staff photographer, Paul Wellman, were found in contempt of court Thursday afternoon, November 29, for refusing to turn over unpublished photographs which had been subpoenaed by defense attorney Karen Atkins in the murder trial of 14-year-old Ricardo Juarez.
Juarez is accused of murdering 15-year-old Luis Angel Linares during a gang melee on State and Carrillo Streets on March 14. Many media, including the Independent, covered the event. Wellman took roughly 350 photos in the hours following the incident. “I have adjudged Mr. Wellman and the Independent to be in contempt,” Hill told the courtroom, which was filled with various media, including several from the Independent, and Juarez’s parents and friends.
Paul Wellman
The parking lot behind Saks Fifth Avenue, on Carrillo Street just off of State Street
Hill took time to explain his decision. “Any one of these photographs might cause the defense to rethink the way they were preparing (their case),” he said, such as who they might call to the stand or who they might impeach. Though California has a Shield Law to protect reporters and photographers in the media, it doesn’t extend to every situation, he said. According to one precedent-setting case, Delaney vs. Superior Court, there are four factors which go into determining whether photos are protected by the Shield law, including whether or not the information was sensitive or confidential. “It seems to me all of those factors lead to favoring the publication of all those photos,” Hill said. Wellman did offer seven photos which were published either in the print edition of the paper or in its online version, but didn’t bring any of the unpublished photos.
Paul Wellman
Santa Barbara Police Chief Cam Sanchez
The Independent's attorney, Michael Cooney, said this case was important not only for the Indy, but for all media organizations. He said if Wellman is forced to hand over the photos, it could open the door to more serious subpoenas in the future asking for reporters’ or photographers’ testimony regarding what they may have seen or who they might have talked to. “We’re on a slippery slope,” he said.
Judge Hill said he understood the media's interests, but cited the 1990 Delaney case which concluded that in some circumstances, the defendant’s federal Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial preempts state shield law.
Hill imposed a $1,000 fine on Wellman and the paper, but ordered a stay in the judgment of contempt pending action by an appellate court.
Paul Wellman
Detectives discover a knife in the trash can.
Atkins—who had previously subpoenaed the Daily Sound’s photographs , and the paper eventually turned them over—said that after looking at the seven published photos Wellman provided, she was anxious to see the rest. “It reaffirms my belief that the body of photos Mr. Wellman took would be important to our case,” she said.
Paul Wellman
Crime scene investigator Mike Ullemeyer with evidence
Wellman commented that he was "relieved to hear that Judge Hill understood that this could set a precedent for us to hand over all our photographs for any investigation. If you hand over unpublished photos you stop being part of the media and you start being an arm of the government. If I went onto a scene," he explained, "and I said, 'This is off the record,' or 'I'm not going to show your face,' or 'I'm not going to disclose the location,' it's going to be hard to sell that to someone if they feel I'm going to turn over photos every time I get subpoenaed."
Paul Wellman
Chief of Police Cam Sanchez (leaning on car) during street lineup
Related Links
These seven previously published photographs of the crime scene were handed over to the court.
Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.
Previous Month
Comments
Discussion Guidelines
Hooray for Paul, and the Indie. It's heartening to see a local newspaper stand up for journalistic principles even when it's inconvenient to them personally. Hallelujah.
Starshine (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2007 at 9:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Morals. Ethics. Good judgement. Truth. That's what I expect from a newspaper - and Paul Wellman is one of the most respected photo journalists we have here in Santa Barbara. His word means something. This could easily harm his reputation, and thus his livelihood.
Contempt of court ?!?!? I think it's contemptible he and the Indy are even being questioned in this case.
Hey Cam, why not go hire your own photographer to be on the scene for the cop shop? There are plenty of photographers who could use the work here.
MediaPro (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2007 at 11:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Seems like the Indy legal team just got another point of argument.
The Police have their own photos that may, might cover the same stuff, especially considering that Wellman arrived at the scene after the murder and may, might have the same photo content as the actual law enforcement agency.
FirstDistrictStreetfighter (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2007 at 11:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I am confused... Who is going to take pictures OF PAUL for this story for the Indy if Paul is on trial.... JK!
Hang in there Paully!
DougE (Doug Elder)
November 30, 2007 at 2:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm truly sorry but I have to point out what a complete idiot Mediapro is.
Cam Sanchez or the police department has nothing to do with this case. It is only the defense that is wanting the photos.
whatphotosb (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2007 at 6:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
whatphoto seems to be the idiot here.
If either the prosecution (via the Police) or the public defender (Atkins) has the photos, then both sides get to see the photos through the trial and legal process.
If the police had their own photos from the crime scene, the public defender could get those photos from that police source instead of a journalist trying to do his job.
The point is that the photos by the Independent photog thus would be even less unique and all the more reason why the public defender really does not need them except for a bit of long shot luck. Such fishing expeditions, with bait or a trawl net, are what this case will be made of when it goes to the Appellate Court and the State Supremes if necessary.
FirstDistrictStreetfighter (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2007 at 9:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
MediaPro seems to be one of the many uninformed; all of the police department's evidence is already in the defense's hands (including their pictures). What the defense wants are more pictures hoping to shed a shadow of doubt on what the police are saying, even though the police are not privy to the independents pictures either. It is a typical fishing expedition and more face time for Atkins in trying to muddy the waters of the evidence that all points to her client as being the killer.
InTheKnow (anonymous profile)
December 1, 2007 at 10:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Isn't the higher purpose here that an accused murderer, esp. a minor, be afforded to best possible defense? Photos were taken, the defense raises an issue if identification of who stabbed the victim. The Defense is trying to get any and all photos/recordings of the scene of the crime. How about Wellman and Cooney stipulating to an 'In Camera' private viewing of the full set of photos, so the Judge, Prosecutor, and Defense get to see all of the images, then the Judge can rule if ANY of the unpublished photos would aid the defense?? I just see that as a VERY different issue than ordering a Journalist to disclose a confidential source.....
HigherPurpose (anonymous profile)
December 1, 2007 at 4:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The Higher Purpose is that no one from The Government should be able to demand the unpublished material in the possession of a journalist.
What is next, the email messages or the reporter's notebooks turned over to The Government? Freedom of the Press is one of the most basic foundations of democracy; that is why it is number one in the Bill of Rights.
If the photos and notes are not confidential, then a news reporting organization cannot function. If these photos were viewed "in camera" for private viewing, anything of interest still would be required as evidence in a trial.
Maybe if Paul Wellman were paid $80 grand a year with a phat pension as an agent of the police and government, he then would disclose all the photos Judge Hill wants because Wellman already would be a cop doing their work for them.
If the Court wants the photos by Wellman, then pay him $80 grand a year with a phat pension so he can work directly for the police or courts. Until then, no outsourcing of this government investigative work should occur on the back of a photo-journalist who has nothing but his credibility and reputation instead of a phat salary.
FirstDistrictStreetfighter (anonymous profile)
December 2, 2007 at 1:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
At the florida paper where I worked (retired) as a photographer for over 35 years.... we were told by company lawyers (20 yrs ago) to not keep any spot news type photos/negs on file...JUST the frame(s) that were published.....just for the reason that happen here...also attorneys tried to use the outtakes in lawsuits after accidents ect......if you don't keep' em they can't get em.....you must make that policy a part that is publishd in the newrooms handbook... I guess it would apply to newspaper video too.
nicholasv (anonymous profile)
December 2, 2007 at 7:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
FirstDistrcit, if you happened to read the article or folowing responses you wouldn't make yourself look so moronic. It is not the police who want the photos. It is the defense that wants them. And in case you didn't know the defense does not work with the police who arrested the defendant. You really should make your arguements after reading a little bit, it would make you look less of a moron.
InTheKnow (anonymous profile)
December 3, 2007 at 9:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Post a comment