Indy Photographer in Contempt of Court

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.....

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.

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.

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.