53 RI Bar J., No. 5, Pg. 11 (March/April 2005). (Speaking Out - A forum for Rhode Island Bar Association members to express their personal viewpoints on issues of interest.) The Taricani Drama: A Play In Two Acts, Not One.

• Author: Thomas R. Bender, Esq.

Rhode Island Bar Journal

Volume 53.

53 RI Bar J., No. 5, Pg. 11 (March/April 2005).

(Speaking Out - A forum for Rhode Island Bar Association members to express their personal viewpoints on issues of interest.) The Taricani Drama: A Play In Two Acts, Not One

March/April 2005pg. 11(Speaking Out - A forum for Rhode Island Bar Association members to express their personal viewpoints on issues of interest.)The Taricani Drama: A Play In Two Acts, Not OneThomas R. Bender, Esq.Thomas R. Bender is a partner in the law firm of Hanson Curran LLP in Providence.

The morning of Channel 10 investigative reporter Jim Taricani's sentencing for criminal contempt of court, M. Charles Bakst, of the Providence Journal, wrote a column entitled "Waiting to see if Judge Torres finally gets it." I enjoy Bakst's columns, but in this instance I think he failed to "get it."

His fundamental mistake was in treating Taricani's drama as if it were a one act play all about freedom of the press when, in reality, it was a two act play. Act I was about the Constitution and confidential sources. Act II was about the rule of law. From the moment the First Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Taricani's First Amendment claim, the case was no longer about press protection - it was about respecting the dignity and authority of the Court.

After Taricani's First Amendment challenge was rejected by the First Circuit, and the focus turned to his continued defiance of the court, Bakst continued to complain Judge Torres had "yet to show any understanding of the work reporters do or of the public's right to know," and was "unable or unwilling to understand the role the news media play in a democracy." Each statement conveys the misimpression Judge Torres could paint his First Amendment vision on a blank canvas, and no harm would come should Taricani suffer no consequences for defying the order. Neither is true.

Many have written about Taricani honoring his promise to his source, but Judge Torres was also honoring a promise. He has sworn to uphold the Constitution. As a District Court judge, in Act I he is obliged to discern what the Supreme Court and the First Circuit have decided about protection of confidential sources and faithfully apply those decisions. He did that. First Amendment scholar Professor David Anderson writes that, although the Supreme Court has refused to...