Access to Court Proceedings

Your Dec. 19 editorial about the increasing frequency of judicial restrictions on the press’ access to courts hit the nail on the head--as far as it went.

You mentioned nothing about the clear abuse by a profession that refuses to police itself, which allows reporters to create news by reporting the opinions of reporters, a profession that allows reporters, editors and publishers to remain uneducated about the subjects they report.

You treat the 1st Amendment as absolute. There must be no restrictions on your access and your “right” to report. I presume your good faith but beg to point out your error. One cannot scream “Fire!” in a crowded theater when there is no fire, irrespective of the 1st Amendment. There are limits, although the press has been afforded the widest latitude by statute and by the Supreme Court.

You bemoan the intrusions into the 1st Amendment but continue to advocate the abolishment of the 2nd Amendment by [gun] regulation and legislation without realizing that your advocacy against the 2nd Amendment contributes to demeaning the entire Bill of Rights.

NORMAN F. BOXLEY

Pasadena

* With all due respect to Bill Boyarsky (“The Spin,” Dec. 15) and his opinion abhorring courts’ sealing of information in sensitive criminal cases and conclusion that “the accurate and fair reporting of all court proceedings is the defendant’s greatest protection”:

Between a newspaperman’s assessment of the situation and that of experienced professionals assigned to represent individuals such as the man accused of killing Bill Cosby’s son, I’ll side every time with the attorneys and their conclusion that pretrial disclosure of details of the cases will taint potential jurors and prejudice their clients’ right to a fair trial.

ALEX RICCIARDULLI

Los Angeles