Complaints Voiced Over Court’s Vow of Silence

Before allowing reporters to enter her courtroom Tuesday to cover the detention hearing of two juveniles accused of murder, Superior Court Judge Sheridan Reed took the extremely unusual step of demanding that they sign an agreement promising not to reveal the names of the juveniles. If they didn’t sign, she wasn’t going to let them into the hearing.

California law closes hearings involving juveniles to the public, except in clearly specified serious cases, such as murder. However, media and the courts often disagree on whether the names of juveniles mentioned in public hearings should be made public.

When reporters gathered for a hearing for two Escondido teen-agers accused of carrying out a contract killing of Robert (Wayne) Pearce outside his Cardiff apartment, they expected to be allowed in. Some had contacted the district attorney’s office and were told they would be given access to the hearing.

“It was our view that the media was entitled to be there,” district attorney spokesman Steve Casey said, noting that his office has no official role in the matter.

Reed, however, wanted assurances from the media that the names of the juveniles would not be released. Contacted Friday, Reed said the court calendar was so heavy that she didn’t have time to properly instruct the reporters as to the law and that the court had a new administrator unaccustommed to dealing with the media in this type of case, so she took the “easy route” of excluding reporters to ensure compliance with her instructions.

“There have been too many accidents in the past,” Reed said, referring to the publication of juveniles’ names. “It doesn’t seem to be something newspapers are advising new reporters about.”

Reporters from The Times, the Escondido-based daily Times-Advocate and KFMB-TV (Channel 8) signed agreements after contacting their editors and, in some cases, attorneys. Reporters from the Blade-Tribune in Oceanside, the San Diego Union and the San Diego Tribune refused to sign.

Ironically, the Times-Advocate already had printed the names the day before, when the two teen-agers were arrested.

“It was important that we be in the courtroom,” Times-Advocate Editor Richard Petersen said in explaining his paper’s decision to sign the agreement.

Petersen said the Times-Advocate printed the names, after considerable discussion, because it was such a major, well-publicized crime. Now that the trial is under way, however, the T-A will revert to its normal policy of not printing the names, in order to “protect (the juveniles) through the proceedings,” Petersen said.

Before the hearing, Reed singled out the Tribune for special admonishment, calling the paper’s reporter into her chambers.

Unlike the Times-Advocate, the Tribune has not printed the names in this case, but, like most newspapers, that doesn’t mean the Tribune won’t print the names in the future.

“We think generally in felony cases that we might want to print the names,” Tribune Deputy Editor Bob Witty said. “These are rather hideous crimes. This case is another example of the right of the public to know.”

Beyond using the names, the larger issue involved is whether a judge can deny the media access to a public hearing. Reed said she is protecting the rights of the juveniles. But restricting the rights of the press may not be the way to do it.

“I’ve never encountered a situation before when reporters were asked to sign an agreement to get into a courtroom,” said Glen Smith, staff counsel for The Times. He also questioned whether signing the agreement would prevent publications from releasing the names if they were learned outside the courtroom--for example, by reading the Times-Advocate.

South Coast Newspapers, owners of the Blade-Tribune and Citizen newspapers, challenged a similar attempt to keep the names of juveniles involved in a sniper incident out of the paper two years ago and won. Blade Editor Bill Missett said his paper would send a letter to court questioning Reed’s agreement.

“It’s clearly out of line,” Missett said.

Reed, who did not know the Times-Advocate had printed the names, said she is considering modifying her stance in the future, perhaps by distributing copies of court policy regarding juvenile names and having reporters sign the policy statement to ensure they understand it.

After issuing a strongly worded statement against any appearance of reporters working in collusion with law enforcement agencies, prompted by the recent actions of KNSD-TV (Channel 39) reporter Paul Bloom, the local chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists asked Bloom to participate in a workshop on the issue. Bloom, who has been more than willing to express his viewpoint to reporters, declined the invitation, citing his busy schedule. “I think it’s great that they’re having a debate,” Bloom said. “I just don’t have time.” On Friday, Channel 39 issued a statement saying Bloom had “crossed the fine line between reporter involvement and actual participation in this story.”

. . . Connie Healy is leaving KFMB-TV (Channel 8). She’s getting married. Her likely replacement as anchor of the noon news is Andrea Naversen. Channel 8’s Marc Brown also is expected to leave next month to take a reporting job with KABC-TV (Channel 7) in Los Angeles. . . .

“Chocolate is simply POISON to dogs” a Page 1 pre-Valentine’s Day headline in the San Diego Union’s “Currents” section proclaimed. A few pages inside, an ad for a candy company featured a St. Bernard with a box of chocolates around its neck. . . . Conspicuously absent from the just-released Rolling Stone readers poll is KGB-FM (101.5), the winner of best radio station, medium market, for the past two years. In the past, KGB has encouraged its listeners to send in ballots, but this year KGB pretty much ignored the whole thing. Last year, after a pseudo-scandal in which some stations were caught stuffing the ballot box, the magazine changed the format, dumping San Diego into the large-market category with 50 other cities.