IMC Reporter Kicked Out of Press Conference

We also have it confirmed that it was Champaign police officer Shannon Bridges who was primarily involved in the beating of the 17 year-old black youth in Douglass Park on March 30. She was also the officer who first approached Donnell Clemons. BD

Apparently, Chief Finney believes he has the right to stage manage the press to his satisfaction. This sort of behavior by the police chief calls into question both his personal maturity and his fitness to serve as a police chief in a democracy with a free press. It also points out how stage-managed and embedded most of the dominant media coverage of law enforcement is in our community. Incidents like this serve as a reminder to other journalists to keep to throwing softball questions or otherwise risk losing their own access. Finally, it points out just how important the independent media is to getting a more complete picture of what goes on in our community out to the public.

I've read several things about Finney's tendency to continue climbing up in various law enforcement bureaucracies for seemingly unfathomable reasons, i.e. not related to any particularly outstanding performance. Has anyone else noticed how Finney looks a little like Vladimir Putin, the ex-KGB agent who now is the Russian strongman. With the mayor's personal health questionable -- let alone his "leadership" in community health -- maybe Finney is sizing up his chances for a mayoral run in Champaign with his tough guy attitude toward the free press. A series of paramilitary mayors would be consistent with the general commitment to democratic process and values on the west side of Wright St.

Finney optimizes on advancing his position within the bureaucracy, not on serving the needs of the community. The guy is a smug jackass. Too bad he didn't respond to the call - he's the most expendable individual in the department.

No way, RT Phoney doesn't look like Putin. Putin is in good shape. Finney is a friggin' weeble.

Finney screwed up. He should be reasonable even if he is in a bad mood. C'mon - the guy carries a gun. You want someone carrying a gun who can't control himself when he's upset?

Comparing Chief Finney's "handling" of the media during the Douglass Park Pepper Spray/Beating of the black youth (who remains criminally charged for aggravated battery of a police officer despite it was the youth who needed hospitalization) where every obsification was made to duck and cover from scrutiny in that case; to these cop shootings where the media was summoned to Gotham City Headquarters that very night for a full briefing....it would seem there is a reason Finney now wants the media involved. Why all the urgency to talk to the media with this case? Finney's Bill of Rights declare The Chief of Police has the right to select which media he is willing to appear in. "I choose who I will talk to" sounds legitimate and probably is, though it reveals much about why Chief Finney chooses to talk to the media and what he expects the media to do with the information he provides. (Note that no media outlet will be allowed to see the police reports in this case.) Whenever the State's Attorney, The Chief of Police, and the Deputy Chief of Police decide to break the law and violate Supreme Court Rule 415(c) by releasing pre-trial discovery material of Mr. Clemons' guilt to all the television stations, all the radio stations, and all the newspapers of the county so all the potential jurors will "understand better"; you can bet at least $1 there is a message law enforcement wants to get out to the public right away. Brian Dolinar's reporting goes against the grain of that message and it has been a study in immaturity how law enforcement officials have reacted to the slightest bit of criticism or accountability. While law enforcement wants to appear open and accountable by opening the floor to questions from the media, those questions can't be disruptive to the flow of the official message. Hence, potential questions from Brian Dolinar had to be removed from the room first. So what is the message law enforcement wants us to know about these three officers getting shot by a mentally ill person?

What are the Chances? If Champaign County has 40,000 traffic tickets and 5,000 criminal cases a year, and the Champaign Police Department handles something like 20,000(?) 30,000(?) incidents a year..... and compare that to how many times officers have really been shot at in this county,.... ....what are the real statistical probability an officer could be shot working in this area?

I can hardly blame Chief Finney for his action. I would have thrown out Dolinar as well. It's certainly not unconstitutional. While the IMC has the right to say whatever it wants, there is no guaranteed right for how it obtains that information. Considering that all the IMC ever does is relentlessly attack local governments and officials, the police chief's move was a pretty predictable one. This brings me to a major point. Brian, you catch more flies with honey. Issues of peace and social justice are very important for all of us. None of us can count on what should be guaranteed rights when even one person, no matter their criminal history or state of mental illness, has theirs violated. Brian, don't you think you would be advancing the cause of peace and justice further by being less confrontational and trying harder to work with local authorities and agencies? Your rhetoric and stance are a real turn off. The work you are trying to do is worthwhile, noble and important, but you are defeating yourself by constantly attacking. Work with the system to change it and accomplish your goals, not against it. By always attacking, you cause everyone to be defensive and that will never foster real change. best of luck, pb

Freedom of the press? Let's see - how many UC-IMC reporters have been jailed for what they publish? None? Sounds like freedom of the press to me. Press conferences with public officials have always been to selected members of the press. Not everyone. I doubt the CPD really has a problem with having an IMC reporter being present - just BD. I'm curious, of the reporters that were allowed into the press conference, how many have been thrown out of city council meetings in the past few months? Like someone said earlier, your reputation might be the problem here, not the CPD's policies.

"The work you are trying to do is worthwhile, noble and important,..." Then pb, why don't you volunteer to write the stories? It doesn't have to be Dolinar all the time. If you know how to do this better, please help the Public I and write your own stories. Or.....would you be kicked out too because law enforcement officials don't consider you a "legitimate" news outlet? "Become defensive"? Why would officials become defensive? They don't have anything to hide, correct?

sorry anonymous, no can do. I am an independent contractor who frequently works with county and local governments and writing for the public i would unfortunately conflict with that. If my situation was different I might be interested in it, but at this time it's just not a reality. pb

To get this story, Local media have so far relied on: 1) the police scanner to hear the call 2) a few "ear" witnesses 3) a janitor from across the street 4) Officials calling press conferences 5) Old News-Gazette articles 6) the Circuit clerk's website .....thus we have only learned that Clemons is black, has two prior convictions for gun-related incidents, lived in his car, and fired the first shots at the officers. Conspicuously absent from the accounts are what everyone in Downtown Champaign already knows..... ....Clemons is likely to be mentally ill. Oh wait, that only gets pulled out when a wealthy psychologist from Cherry Hills stabs her two children- one to death- with a kitchen knife. (Fineberg, 2003) Before Mayor Jerry swaggers before city council to revisit the Taser issue, before the CPD justifies why they need to be more aggressive with black males on the street in the name of officer safety, before we pass an Anti-Car-Living Ordinance, we better have a comprehensive social policy for these crazed housewives in suburban Champaign. For the conservative literalists out there who don't comprehend metaphor, the point is: this tragic incident is an extremely rare one, has its roots in the mentally ill's perception of law enforcement nowadays, and does not require throwing out the U.S. Constitution and civil rights, does not require classifying certain kinds of people as always dangerous, does not justify increased police budgets and patrols, does not justify giving an officer a taser, and does not justify tighter gun-sale regulations. This is a random, once-in-a-couple-of-decades event, and cannot be predicted nor prevented by anyone. It's sad to see the police department and the state's attorney use this tragedy for publicity purposes to further some agenda for more jails, more police, and more imaging for future re-election campaigns. Do we really need Rietz to tell the public Officer Bridges was shot above her vest? Please. Hey Julia, the cameras are pointing at the Uben gym today, better get over there to comment on the basketball recruits too. Watch this thing go political to beat back the Civilian Review Board idea. According to Finney, those brave heroes who got shot to protect me should instill in all of us a deep reverence for the police and we should quit our questioning, quit demanding the U.S. Constitution be followed, believe every police report is completely true, and know that never never do these human police officers ever ever screw up or lose their tempers out there or carry a bias. Oh boy. It is stuff like this that created the Three Strikes laws in California.

Here's an interesting thing: BD went to the press conference, arguably to gather information about the story. So, where's the story? There are other sources besides the press conference (e.g., press releases, interviews with witnesses or area residents, other media sources), yet there's no story about the event. If BD were so set on getting information to write a story, I'd like to know what happened to it. So far, there's an introductory paragraph vaguely describing events, and then many paragraphs talking about BD's suffering over the incident. Is he the real victim in a shooting that left four people wounded and in the hospital?

To Anon 7:29a.m.: I don't see how this event with Clemons could ever be described as an example of police brutality, ect.... the call came in as a man in a car showing a gun to a citizen. It's kind of surprising officers were so casual in deciding to walk toward cars in the area. Did the 21-year veteran Deputy Chief Murphy come up with this idea to start approaching cars to see who had a gun? What led to the officers being shot at more than anything (besides Clemons' deranged state of mind) was the incomplete information METCAD gave the officers. Officers did not know where the car was or which car it was when they arrived at the scene. The dispatcher should have elicited that information first. Perhaps they did, but the caller hung up or something. Whatever the reason,... officers were left wandering up to cars to inquire where a gunman in a car might be found. Horrible strategy and put the officers in grave danger. Had the three officers known that it was that particular silver car where the man with a gun was located, it's easily imagined officers would have never walked out into the open like that, exposing themselves quite the same way. But Chief Finney doesn't portray the event as a miscommunication that exposed his officers, does he? No, the incident is being used to remind the public that there exists this all-encompassing, nebulus, everywhere, anyday-it-could-happen danger that only police officers face. (in fact, 99% (?) of all gun shots are aimed at us civilians) So, it's agreed, Anon 7:29a.m., let's not start fiddling with the rulebook or policy manual to "make sure this never happens again." I doubt a new rule or procedure or new toy or more officers on the street is going to stop anyone of us from snapping out. The quality of most of the political leadership in this town, however, is reactionary, prejudicial, and exploitive. You can't help but wonder how this incident with a mentally ill person is going to be used to "do something".

So, BD, if I'm sitting on a park bench in West Side Park, and you come jogging along, and you "provoke" me, say with your lack of basic intelligence, I have the right to jump up and yank a pair of six-shooters out of their holsters and chase after you with guns-a-blazin'? Aren't you even slightly concerned about the danger an ARMED, deranged, homeless man obviously posed to the neighborhood people, children, and pets, say nothing of the schools in the immediate vicinity? Duh-h, doesn't VTI, Columbine, etc. ring a bell with you?!! No doubt if the police had attemped to deal with this in a pre-emptive fashion by detaining and searching this nutcase you would have been screeching to high heavens about violating his civil rights. Let's be brutally honest. You socialist/anarchists are so warped with your frothing hatred of any kind of democratically-installed societal structure and authority you have long ago forfeited any right to participate in any meaningful community dialog. Why don't you all get the hell out of C/U and go establish your neo-marxist utopia someplace else.

I believe we really need to be careful about making comments regarding the concept of Freedom of Speech and Press. Historically this is something that evolved from the concept that a citizen can form an opinion and be critical of government without being penalized or accused of treason. This same freedom gives the media the right to exercise editorial decisions regarding the content that is published or posted. What Illini Pundit chooses to do, or not as some posters have pointed out, is really not the concern of the IMC. Any message board that has posting policies has the right to enforce those guidelines. This does not violate the 1st Admendment rights of posters who may have comments hidden. Neither do I think it's appropriate to confuse the shootings in West Side Park with the fact that a writer for the 'Public I' was escorted out of a press conference. If we as citizens choose to remain silent while public servants are allowed to decide who is, and isn't a member of the press that can set a dangerous precedent. Just as the IMC has no right to tell Illinipundit what to do the police department does not have the right to tel the IMC what to write or publish. By having BD escorted from the press conference Finney was absolutely out of line. What next - will a student reporter from the Daily Illini be barred from attending press conferences? As for what happened in West Side Park - No Comment.

Marti, I think you may be misunderstanding "Freedom of the Press". "The Press" is not a separate entity within the citizenry. There is no distinct legal class known as the Fourth Estate. "The Press" as written in our constitution means the act of publishing. Freedom of the Press means the right of the citizenry to publish. As enshrined in the Constitution and maintained and interpreted by the USSC, this is how it is. Those who write and publish do not have a separate set of rights that they can live by. Those are rights that are held by all Americans. If you step back from the situation a little and re-examine the facts, the police department did not tell IMC what to write or publish. What they did was to remove Brian's ability to ask questions. The IMC can still write and publish whatever it wants, it will just have to get the information elsewhere. Brian being removed from the press conference was a reflection on Brian, not the IMC or Chief Finney or the CPD. pb

or that at least was the reasoning of the Champaign Police Department at the time of the press conference. The decision to remove Brian was frankly wrong and if it's based on personalities then that is simply unprofessional. Additionally exactly how have government officials and public servants been hassled? Asking tough questions is not harassment and when public servants consider themselves to be immune to scrutiny they can no longer be effective. As for my decision to not comment on what happened around West Side Park I have my reasons for not doing so. I will say this: I do not condone or support violent actions towards the police or suspects if it can be avoided. While I may not always agree with law enforcement I do have respect for the people who put themselves at risk.

The colorful logos for delicious, digg, google, and technorati are really really tacky. Can they be suppressed?

"That depends. If the student reporter in question has a history of showing up to City Council meetings, being disruptive, and eventually thrown out, then probably so. Maybe if the UCIMC had some reporters who didn't do that kind of stuff, they wouldn't have gotten kicked out." If you will re-examine some of the video footage from the Champaign city council meeting Tuesday Apr 3, 2007 you'll see it was Martel Miller, not myself, who was escorted out by Finney and the Mayor. BD

BE, peace. Let me start by saying that CUCPJ is a NON-VIOLENT grass-roots organization and we condemn acts of violence in all forms. A broader definition of violence may be needed, but to be sure, we do not support individuals who were rummaging through trash cans being killed, or dying, while being "subdued" by officers. Nor do we wish to see officers shot, injured, or killed by other citizens (mentally disturbed or not). We know violence is not the answer. My prayers are for the speedy recovery of the officers and for the proper help for the shooter. If heroin, crack/cocaine, weed and Meth are illegal because of the damage they might cause to the public then why are guns, alcohol and cigarettes legal? We don't want our population saturated with drug users and dealers and we definitely don't want children to be affected by access to them. Where do they get the guns from? Where does a homeless and mentally challenged person get one from? What about a war on guns and drugs that locks up the manufacturers of them instead of the poor and mis-educated who use them ignorantly? I know this is challenging to those who have raped, robbed, murdered and mis-educated folks everywhere that they have gone on the planet, but it's starting to look more and more like the invention of guns that has led to WMD, will be our downfall, afterall. Events like the shooting of the police officers in our small county is an eye opener to the "guards of the system". When people are poor, desperate and confused it leads to crime, violence and a lack of compassion that has no moral code. WHEN this happens the "guards of the system" the police officers, the soldiers are sent in to the hostile territory to do their masters bidding, to protect the gains of the elite because when it is all said and done, like the guards at Attica and the soldiers in Iraq, they are expendable to! I have been and will continue to appeal to the essence/spirit of everyone I come in contact with in Champaign county and elsewhere. The real driving force behind CUCPJ has always been to build bridges of communication; and through empowerment of the citizenry, bring accountability to systems and the people that run them. It is a shame that all of the work we have done to accomplish these lofty goals is being scoffed at by those who have mistakenly perceived our actions as anti-police or anti-government. It is not anti-government or police to suggest, ask for, strongly encourage and then demand transparency of OUR government. Contrary to prior belief, "Renee Dunn works for you and I and so does Chief Finney". These are trying times for the CPD (Eaves dropping scandal, Douglass Center abuse of Teen, officers Shot )..... UPD (Hjort and the lack of investigation in the Patrick Thompson case)..... Sheriff's Dept (6 "suicides" and EX- Sgt. Myers torturing of inmates)....... States Attorney's obvious and not so obvious conflicts of interest: dropping one charge against Thompson and keeping the other, prosecuting an inmate in the county jail and at the same time paying him under the table because he's going to sue the sheriff's dept that she has to defend as the SA....... Judge Difanis telling a citizen with a drug addiction that she is a hopelss junkie and that the only thing positive about her is that she was fertile and able to bring children in to the world. What do you do when your ELECTED/SELECTED officials refuse to hear your proposals? You try to work with them. If they refuse? Then you run against them or work to remove them while finding someone to replace them. Isn't that the Democratic process? Isn't that a government of the people, by the people and for the people? Finally, It is a fact that murder is designed to hide the truth! Character assisination is intended to be a social/political form of murder. Why so much resistance to a CPRB, to taping police actions and a lil' ole reporter from the lil' ole IMC (who has press credentials that Chief Finney himself has signed off on) having access to the same info and the same people that the rest of the media has access to? I guess as the dollar falls and civil liberties are snatched away the spirit and the law of the constitution can't help but to follow. BE, just.

Careful review of the press conferences on June 7, 2007 and June 8, 2007, and both News-Gazette articles, reveals:........ Officers did NOT know where and what to look for when they answered the call. My concern for the officers is that they were given incomplete information by METCAD. Officers did not know where the car was, did not know which car it was that had the gunman. That's why they were left walking in front of a deranged psychotic with only a vest on- no guns drawn. "Man has a gun in Westside Park" does not give officers much to work with. Finney admitted that all three officers were approaching Clemons' car to ask him if he had seen anything. That's why their guns weren't drawn, that's why Clemons had the jump on them. This does not put blame on the police for what happened. It just goes to show that when people dial 911, they should stay on the line with the dispatcher to give all the information they can. I assume the dispatcher was trying to get that information before sending the officers out. Consider too, that Finney said that the department in general knew of this man living in his car for two years and Clemons had never before been a problem for police. Police had little reason to suspect they were walking in front of bullets by approaching Clemons' car. As for telling a certain person of the press to leave a press conference, it is totally unacceptable. Preventing Brian Dolinar from making an "ass" of himself at a press conference is not the Chief's job. He called an open press conference to all the media to answer questions. Like the Chief did with some of the questions asked at the press conference, Finney could have easily declined comment if he found one of Dolinar's questions out of line. But no, Finney already had in mind how he felt the press conference should go, and it was interesting that Finney scoffed at WDWS's radio reporter Patrick Pinkston when Pinkston asked if police provoked the conflict. It was a reasonable question in light of the recent Douglass Park incident. Finney was in no mood for any other narratives other than the one he wanted the press to know. Finney called Pinkston's question, "...ridiculously absurd...." Perhaps Finney will now ban WDWS's Patrick Pinkston for his daring insolence? Maybe Finney should ban the WILL-AM580 radio reporter who couldn't remember the name of the officers? How about Finney banning the TV babe who kept asking the same question over and over? I guess President George Bush can follow Finney's lead and review the publications represented in the White House press pool and kick those out who have been critical of the war, eh? If this case is a big deal, and perhaps it should be, then why are the explanations for how the shooting happened so shallow, so uninformative? "Police were shot at because a black, homeless man, (see, here's his picture on the N-G front page courtesy of the Sherriff's department) with a history of two gun-related convictions, shot first at police, so there: see how dangerous police work is? Shouldn't you all be grateful for what the police do?" That's the narrative Finney wanted the press to come down to his office and report on. Finney shouldn't call press conferences nor open the floor to questions if wants the story to go a certain way.

Reporter Arrested on Orders of Giuliani Press Secretary: Charged with Criminal Trespass Despite Protest of CNN Staff and Official Event Press Credentials at GOP Debate in New Hampshire Jones Report http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/050607_reporter_arrested_giuliani_or... Manchester, NH Freelance reporter Matt Lepacek, reporting for Infowars.com, was arrested for asking a question to one of Giuliani's staff members in a press conference. The press secretary identified the New York based reporter as having previously asked Giuliani about his prior knowledge of WTC building collapses and ordered New Hampshire state police to arrest him. Jason Bermas, reporting for Infowars and America: Freedom to Fascism, confirmed Lepacek had official CNN press credentials for the Republican debate. However, his camera was seized by staff members who shut off the camera, according to Luke Rudkowski, also a freelance Infowars reporter on the scene. He said police physically assaulted both reporters after Rudkowski objected that they were official members of the press and that nothing illegal had taken place. Police reportedly damaged the Infowars-owned camera in the process. Watch the whole unbelievable episode here: http://img.youtube.com/vi/VOerYpJse30/2.jpg Reporters were questioning Giuliani staff members on a variety of issues, including his apparent ignorance of the 9/11 Commission Report, according to Bermas. The staff members accused the reporters of Ron Paul partisanship, which press denied. It was at this point that Lepacek, who was streaming a live report, asked a staff member about Giuliani's statement to Peter Jennings that he was told beforehand that the WTC buildings would collapse. Giuliani's press secretary then called over New Hampshire state police, fingering Lepacek. Though CNN staff members tried to persuade police not to arrest the accredited reporter -- in violation of the First Amendment, Lepacek was taken to jail. The police station told JonesReport.com that Lepacek is being charged with felony criminal trespass. Lepacek did receive one phone call in jail which he used to contact reporter Luke Rudkowski. According to Rudkowski, Lepacek was scared because he had been told he may be transferred to a secret detention facility because state police were also considering charges of espionage against him -- due to a webcam Lepacek was using to broadcast live at the event. State police considered it to be a hidden camera, which led to discussion of "espionage." Wearing a webcam at a press event is not an act of espionage. Alex Jones, who was watching the live feed, witnessed Lepacek announce that he was wearing a camera connected to a laptop that was transmitting the press conference live at approximately 9:20 EST. When Lepacek announced that he was broadcasting live, Giuliani staff members responded by getting upset at his questions and ordering his arrest. Freedom to Fascism reporter Samuel Ettaro was also dragged out after asking a question on Giuliani's ties with Cintra and Macquerie, two foreign contractors involved with the contentious Trans-Texas Corridor under development in Texas. The entire incident took place in a large press auditorium, apart from the debate stages where authorized media were able to question candidates and their handlers. Since when do campaign operatives have the power to order state police to arrest someone on false charges or arbitrate who has the right to conduct journalism, a right guarded by the Constitution? A warning to the press-- if candidates or police don't like your questions, you could be arrested for trespassing and even espionage in the new Orwellian America. The state police in Goffstown, New Hampshire, where the arrest was made, confirmed that Lepacek is in custody on charges of criminal trespass. Police said information on who filed the trespass complaint was not yet available and would be filed in the police report. It is clear from talking to multiple eyewitness, as well as the live webcam, that there could not have been a complainant who originated police action, because it happened spontaneously. The police need to be very careful about violating the Bill of Rights and falsely charging someone with a felony crime. This constitutes extreme official oppression and is a total violation of the reporter's civil rights. It would have been bad enough if the reporter would have just been thrown out, but to arrest him when he had a valid press pass and CNN protested his arrest is an outrage. The arrest-- which clearly violated the First Amendment-- was recorded from two separate camera angles, including a live feed recorded remotely-- so the episode is on record in the event that police destroy or lose tapes seized from Lepacek in attempt to obfuscate the facts of the incident. If you doubt that police would assault reporters, seize video equipment and act on political orders, then consider the experience Alex Jones had when Texas state troopers arrested him for asking George W. Bush a question during a press conference while he was governor. See video here: http://img.youtube.com/vi/aoyn_doplUM/2.jpg

I glanced over the hidden posts, since I've been dragged into this comment hiding debate against my will. I trust I can quote a short piece of a hidden comment without getting into trouble: "All the others, like Gehrig and illyes sitting by, watching it happen and doing nothing about it. I mean, how spineless can you get?" Gehrig can speak for himself, but I point out that this UCIMC publication is edited, as is the Public i on which I work. This means that no author can assume that his work will appear without the approval of the editorial group. I do not agree with all decisions regarding what to hide and what not to hide on this site, but I am not a member of the Web group and am therefore not a part of their decision-making process. I appreciate the fact that the Web group hides a lot of comments that are redundant or that add nothing to the issues being discussed beyond personal attacks. I note that they do not hide some comments that do contain personal attacks but also contain non-redundant discussions of the issues in the article. I'd like to see this site be a place where folks of all political persuations can have a civil discussion. The only thing that is preventing this, to my knowledge, is the determination of some folks from both the left and right to engage in personal attack. I regret this systematic bridge burning, and see nothing good that can come of it. Bob

The UCIMC doesn't take tax monies, anonymous 11:13. You criticize us without knowing what we are. Look over the hidden posts. What do you see? 1) The author doesn't like Brian. 2) The author doesn't like ML. 3) The author doesn't like the UCIMC. There is a little beyond this, but not much. This negtive stuff is a complete waste of the reader's time. Incidentally, I'm told that Shannon Bridges will likely recover. At least there is a little good news regarding the park shooting. Bob

I looked at the Illinois Arts Council web site, and they identify themselves as a state agency, so you're right, anonymous 11:36. This discussion is getting completely off-topic, however. Anonymous 11:13 is a good example of a comment that should be hidden, although I would suggest it be left as an example of why hiding is a good idea. It is a rant against the IMC, and contains nothing addressing the attached article. Bob

As the author of anonymous 11:13, Bob, (if you are the same Bob), I should remind you that I was responding to your own posting "Comment Hiding." So if I was off-topic, so were you. But I didn't see you suggesting that YOUR post be hidden. By calling for my reply to be hidden, you have only reinforced my initial thesis of intolerance to criticism through retributive censorship. As far as characterizing it as "rant against the IMC," I thought I was doing the organization a favor by pointing out the conditions that justifiably or not, could expose it to litigation. And I don't think I have to remind you that there's plenty of groups out there with deep pockets who would gladly provide the attorneys to do just that.

Off-topic means not addressing the article, anonymous 1:53. A certain amount of off-topic stuff is not a problem, provided it is civil, but a pattern of it is. Since the number of hidden posts in this thread indicate that we have too many authors who either don't get this or don't wish to get this, I thought I'd try to clarify the matter. Further discussion of this matter is a waste of time. Bob

On September 24, 2006, black community activist Martel Miller went down to the Champaign Police Station with another man who wanted to file a complaint alleging police brutality. The two men were kicked out of the Champaign Police Station by Sgt. Matt Crane and refused the opportunity to file a complaint. The man was discouraged from ever going back to the station. Miller filed his own complaint about Crane’s “unprofessional” behavior, which we published in the November issue of the Public i. I went down to the Champaign Police Station today, June 11, 2007, to file a complaint for being summarily ejected from a press conference by Chief Finney and Troy Daniels. I asked the secretary to fill out a complaint form. She called somebody to come down and speak with me. Who did they send down to talk to me, but Deputy Chief Troy Daniels – without a form in hand. He acted surprised when I asked to see someone else. He said he would call another Deputy Chief. While I was waiting (I had already waited 20 minutes), Troy Daniels took the time to do an interview with a WCIA reporter on the “spike of violence in Champaign-Urbana.” Daniels said Champaign police have stepped up patrols in the Garden Hills neighborhood, what he called a “problem area.” Due to the warm weather, people tend to “gather in groups” was his explanation to the rise in police patrolling. While expressing the need for more police in black neighborhoods, Daniels provided contrary information of a “downward trend” in violent crime. He cited statistics that show violent crime is down 23% in Champaign: 1996 – 2350 violent crimes 2006 – 1800 violent crimes When Daniels was done with his interview, another Deputy Chief had still not arrived to speak with me. Finally, Daniels brought out a complaint form which I took, told him I would return the next day, and wished him a good day. BD

WTF's a "nymn?" Even OED fails me...

I am troubled by the Chief of Police kicking out Brian but mainly as it pertains to the rights of independent journalists. Did he have him kicked out because he was independent or because he felt that Brian wasn't a true journalist. If it was over the independent factor I'd be extremely worried. As corporatized and dehumanized as the media has become I have welcomed the internet revolution and the access to radio and printing independent newspapers newer and cheaper technology has allowed. It hits my basic patriotic nerve of promoting dissent in spite of the powers that be that go back to the founding of our nation as imperfect as it was. The massive amounts of money involved with the main stream media immediately make me doubt their ability to report fairly and without bias. To most news outlet the news industry appears to be more of another part of the entertainment industry than a place where you find facts and information without bias. For biased information you turn to the opinion section to hear what their views are. It isn't intermixed like we see on CNN or Fox or MSNBC etc. Where the opinion and news section are intertwined to the point of being inseparable. That said I would like to hear a better explanation from the Chief of Police about why Brian was prohibited from the press conference. It was because he was an independent in the world of journalism I'd be very upset. If it was because they honestly did not believe that Brian upheld the tenants of being a journalist then I'd feel a bit better about the situation. I pointed out the Code of Ethics at the Society of Professional Journalists the other day on IP in direct regards to this subject. No matter how well intentioned his activism and apparent bias could lead someone to believe he has little objectivity on the subject of police matters and thus negate his claim to being an ethical journalist. If this is their argument I could understand. Though I believe as an independent journalist one could be extremely biased towards a cause if they so choose but face the consequences of being considered non-objective and lose credibility over that. I hope the UCIMC through Brian or others at the "Public i" can get a better explanation of this denial of press credentials for this very reason. Anyone who knows me or is aware of my posts at IP.com or my own blog knows that I am probably not in line with his personal views on most issues but I am one of those whacky folks that would defend his right to the death to say them. I also believe that an independent media is critical to democracy especially once a democracy begins to tread closer and closer to allowing fascist-style edicts and policies. While I do not agree that is the case today, the right of a free press and more importantly an INDEPENDENT press is critical to preventing and opposing such a situation if it ever truly comes about. Brian, I respect your devotion to your cause even if I disagree with the methods and arguments you may use in pursuit of that cause. I wish more people had similar devotions on my own side of the political spectrum. ML, I respect your editorial concerns on keeping content on topic and maintaining editorial privilege over what comments are appropriate in a moderated forum, but I honestly believe that mere dissent should be given a bit more deference so this forum does not have the appearance of an ideological echo chamber. I can understand some of the more notorious attackers being moderated out but some of the comments appear to be fairly reasonable dissent that should be addressed. I don't mean this as an attack but as an honest suggestion in the spirit of aiding independent media. I absolutely do not mean to imply that some of the more emotionally based and ad hominem attacks should be allowed, just that more openness to dissent may help alleviate some of the attacks I've seen lately. To that end I hope that the independent media here in town flourishes for all sorts of the underrepresented portions of our society and becomes a far more reliable partner with the community to espouse views that the traditional media may otherwise ignore. Like most good intentions I think there are some improvements on the actions to be considered and I hope they will be considered so that in the future UCIMC or Public i reporters are not excluded from press conferences but given the same credence as more traditional reporters. Brian seems to have the devotion but perhaps not the objectivity to be the guy on the front line for that. I'm just a blogger that gets most of his comments and responses on an IRC politics channel and the local IP.com blog though. So take my opinion as you will. I'm certainly no expert on the media in general or journalism in general. Just my 2 cents as a local independent who would like to see more independent journalism in our area. - Glock21 (tried to register but running into some sort of problem)

The News-Gazette ran an editorial in their Tuesday, June 12 edition. Now some may say that the N-G's polite and respectful approach is the way to go. And I'm not necessarily saying that IMC coverage was, is, or should be impolite or disrespectful, for instance regarding the incident at West Side Park. But the people of this community are getting damn tired of the BS "can't say nothin'" approach to what should be, has in the past, and is Constitutionally-guaranteed to be easily available information for the public. Considering vital parts of modern info networks -- the internet -- WERE, in fact, invented in U-C, it's a bit weird to see parts of our local county government hiding the facts of most interest to the public, pedaling backwards into some sort of public info Cold War, where nothing can ever be released, because it's too complicated, sensitive, or politically problematic to see the light of day and be read by the public. This kind of closed government is dangerous, out-of-control, and a threat to the liberties and freedoms Americans hold dear. It would be good if the News-Gazette could be a bit less polite -- and a lot more curious and persistent -- in the way it cover local problems of crime and justice. The issues wasn't made up by journalists as some insist; various communities have long been aware of such problems, but rarely are in a position to do anything about it if the press is willing to cooperate with local law enforcement to make the problems "disappear" when racial disparity in justice is all around us.

It doesn't say in the US Constitution that information should be made easily available, Anon 8:14. It also doesn't say that voting outcomes in the Congress should be determined by the majoriity. To understand the Constitution, it must be understood in the context in which is was written, and with a certain amount of common sense. Chief Finney's expulsion of Brian is contrary to intent of the First Amendment, which is to support a free press. Had Brian been disruptive, preventing Finney from conducting the press conference, it would have been proper to expel him, but this is not what happened. It doesn't take a law to make this the case, it just requires respect for the idea of a free press. Bob

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOerYpJse30