http://www.kirotv.com/sports/11017440/detail.html

Here's a story that compliments our reading for the week.

I understand the need to report, and the need by which to gather information. But, what I don't understand is why the underhandedness from an attorney? One, the details that he/she leaked is not worth being disbarred over, two, why wouldn't he/she want for a potential fair trial, and three, what did he have to gain in the end?

This story is text book example of the extent that reporters will go in order to secure the informants identity, and the extremes that are gone to in order to have a story. Where were their ethics during this time? Why would they think it's ok to use this type of information, knowing full well that the information is not to be disclosed. How do the defendants have a fair trial when two eager reporters, and a shady attorney are doing all they can to destroy these people. I find this type of reporting and characteristics to be deplorable. I see nothing good that came from this. Now, the reporters get to sit anxiously while they wait for their turn in court. Reporting a viable story is obviously important, but this type of behavior only sullies those reputations of reporters that are seriously seeking information in a legal way. Not all information is obtained legally, but you would think that more caution, or a look at what the potential consequences would be before delving into something like this.