State Supreme Court Declines to Hear Indy Contempt Case

Ok I am going to ask the question: Why would one NOT want to furnish the photos to the cops, DA, defense? It seems anything that would add more information to help define what happened would assist in justice being served. What do the reporters and photographers need protection from?

Is it their property and they feel they should be compensated for it?

Maybe I missed something or am naive, but I don't get it. Fine call me names.

bimtoteski, you are naive.

Where will this stop with the courts demanding the photos or notes of a news reporter?

is that all you got? can you tell me more? freedom of the press? does the fact that they demand them mean that the reporters are not allowed to publish? they want all and originals which you may or may not get back at their discretion? form of censorship? fine I'm naive.

The press often thinks of themselves as a protected class, above the rest of the public. They have an arrogance about them that others often don't possess. Look at John Palminteri as a perfect example. He gets upset if someone does not know who he is, “But I’m John Palminteri don’t you know who I am?” Freedom of the press is one of the founding elements to our Constitution. But this issue is not about censorship of an article or divulging a confidential informant to a major governmental scandal. It is about our legal system being the fairest that it can be and providing all the evidence that is available to a person; a value that we cherish greatly. To hide behind the old cliché “But where will it stop?” is simply asinine and off basis. It would be similar to contending that since the courts can issue a warrant for a person’s home to be search on probable cause then where will it all stop? Next they might be quartering troops in our house!!! Get your head out of the sand, you are the naïve one here FirstDistrictStreetfighter.

Ok well I probably wouldn't have gone that far, but it seems to me the Independent/photographer is just holding up due process, whatever it may turn out to be on this one. How much longer, and how much more expensive will all that be with this information omitted because of what reason? I would love to get the photographers or the Independents argument as to why they do not wish to furnish the photos.

P.S. The Palm has never said: “But I’m John Palminteri don’t you know who I am?” Has he?

What help would the photos help the defense since Wellman started shooting after the incident once the cops had people in handcuffs. I'm sure anything she could have found of value she got from the police photographer.

Let's not forget the care taken by Wellman to publish only those pictures which did not reveal the faces of those involved in the incident. He worked with the scene after an hour had passed and had the taste and decency not to expose the identities of the children at the scene. With all the sound and fury of Adkins, she neglects to understand the distinction of art versus forensic detail. What evidence does a photojournalist have that would surpass that of local law enforcement?

As they say, be careful what you wish for. Adkins, making such a broad request without knowing what photos specifically will now be produced, may unintentionally unearth some evidence that helps the prosecution.

Ironically, she did the District Attorney a favor, because if the government had made the request instead of the defense, the judge may have been more protective of the photographers' rights.