Providence Paper Fined, Editor Given Probation for Contempt

A federal judge on Wednesday sentenced the editor of the Providence Journal-Bulletin to a suspended 18-month prison term and fined the newspaper $100,000 for publishing a story in defiance of his restraining order, even though he previously had acknowledged that the restraining order was possibly unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Francis J. Boyle said he made the penalty so large because the newspaper had chosen to “boldly communicate . . . defiance” of the court system by publishing the story without first appealing the order to a higher court.

Penalty ‘Astronomical’

Press attorneys, acknowledging the judge’s sentence is probably legally correct, nonetheless called the severity of the penalty “astronomical” and expressed hope that the newspaper would appeal.

In a prepared statement, Journal Publisher Michael P. Metcalf said the newspaper and its editor regret that Boyle “has seen fit to impose criminal sanctions for a decision that was made by the newspaper in good faith and in the reasonable belief that the First Amendment justified the publication.”

“We shall review the order with our attorneys and take such action as we may be advised.”

Charles Hauser, the editor involved, declined to comment on the verdict. If the sentence stands, Hauser would be on probation for 18 months and would perform 200 hours of community service.

The case involves a Journal story published Nov. 14 about the late Raymond L. S. Patriarca, the reputed former Mafia boss in New England. The story was based on FBI documents the paper obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.

Reason for Court Order

Patriarca’s son had asked the court to bar publication of anything from the documents, and on Nov. 13 Boyle had issued a temporary restraining order to give him time to study the issue.

But the Journal, and its sister publication, the Evening Bulletin, published the story anyway. Five days later, Boyle lifted his order acknowledging that higher courts would likely find it unconstitutional.

But in a ruling last month, Boyle found the newspaper and its editor in criminal contempt for violating his order, arguing that the “Journal set itself above the law.”

Attorneys have said that the case is something of an aberration, both because of Boyle’s quickness to invoke a gag order and the paper’s decision to publish without first appealing.

Traditionally, said Wall Street Journal attorney Robert Sack, if a news organization is restrained from publishing and believes the order unconstitutional, it must make some attempt to appeal that order first before defying it.

However, Hauser said he decided to publish without doing so “because you can’t appeal a temporary restraining order as a practical matter” in Rhode Island, because the federal appellate court in the region will not accept such cases.

Size of Fine Questioned

Jane Kirtley, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said: “The legal precedent probably supports the ruling, but not the size of the fine. . . . I hope they are going to appeal it.”

Normally, Kirtley said, if reporters are found in contempt of court for refusing to reveal sources, they are fined $100 a day. “You have to go a long time at that rate to reach $100,000,” the amount in this case.

Boyle said he arrived at the amount by calculating that the fine equaled 50 cents for every one of the paper’s roughly 200,000 subscribers.