Sent:
Sunday, March 19, 2006 3:08 PM
Subject:
Brown v. Damiani - Judges can't
gag media or internet reporters
on DCF/CPS corruption or their criminal
behavior on cases before them.
Subject:
Brown v. Damiani - Judges can't gag
media or internet reporters on DCF/CPS
corruption or their criminal behavior
on cases before them.
Brown v.
Damiani, 154 F. Supp. 2d 317
(D. Conn. 2001) (self-described “internet
human rights reporter” had standing
to bring a § 1983 claim against a
Connecticut Superior Court judge who
issued a gag order in an adoption
dispute. The reporter, although
not a party to the dispute or bound
by the gag order, had standing to
pursue this claim because the order
may have interfered with his First
Amendment rights as a recipient of
speech.)
FIRST AMENDMENT
Brown v.
Damiani (U.S. District
Court): This case involves
an order by a Superior Court
judge to a pre-adoptive parent
in a DCF custody case to not discuss
anything related to the case with
the media. We are representing
an internet journalist who is
seeking to report on non-personally
identifiable information about
the government’s actions. It is
our position that the government
has an interest in protecting
the identity of children in termination
and custody cases, but that this
power cannot be used to prevent
parties from complaining to the
media about alleged government
abuses
P.S. Check out
our web site for the FREE handbook
on parental rights. There is
also a manual on "reasonable
efforts" with sections for Attorneys,
Judges and Agencies. |
