Federal Agents Take Notes p.15

By: DOROTHY GIOBBE

PRESS GROUPS WERE outraged following the U.S. Forrest Service's recent arrest of two journalists at the Eugene, Ore., Register-Guard and the confiscation and examination of their notes and film.
Reporter Jeff Wright and photographer Anthony Robert La Penna were arrested for second-degree criminal trespass and placed in handcuffs for more than three hours. The arrests came as the two were attempting to report on the eviction of protesters from a logging site near Warner Creek, Ore. The Forrest Service declared the area closed due to concerns about public safety.
La Penna's two cameras, five rolls of film, and other equipment were seized, as was Wright's reporter's notebook. The film was developed and copies were made of Wright's notes.
Forrest Service officials returned the material a few days later, after the Register-Guard threatened to go to court to obtain an injunction for violations of constitutional free press guarantees and the Oregon state shield law.
"To say that we are outraged is too mild," said Jim Godbold, managing editor for the Register-Guard. "We did not trespass and did not violate any law."
Mike Morris, spokesman for the Forrest Service, said he has no idea why the film was developed.
"I don't know the answer to that," he said. "To my knowledge, they were not reviewed by anyone except the prosecuting attorneys and the defense attorneys. From what I understand [the photos] were sealed and returned to the newspaper."
Additionally, Morris said that information contained on the film and in the notes could be used as evidence "if there were pictures taken that proved the persons were where they weren't supposed to be."
According to Godbold, a top official at the Forrest Service did review the notes in order to determine whether they had any value as evidence.
The developed photos, Godbold said, were returned to the newspaper in a sealed envelope.
As of E&P's deadline, the Lane County District Attorney's office had not indicated whether it would press charges against Wright and La Penna.
Even though the material was returned, Godbold says the issue may not be over.
"It's very disturbing and very dangerous to the protections of the First Amendment," Godbold said. "Right now we're compiling information to get whatever protections that were violated restored to us."
Some damage already is irreversible. Godbold said that Wright's notebook contained notes on the logging eviction story that included interviews with subjects who were promised confidentiality.
Also, Wright's notebook contained information on unrelated stories and investigations.
"We are alarmed and upset to the bottom of our souls. Our credibility is definitely damaged," Godbold said.
The incident sparked an immediate outcry from press groups, including the Society of Professional Journalists.
"The action by the Forrest Service is unconscionable and in no way can be justified by the argument that the notes and film might have produced evidence of trespass," said G. Kelly Hawes, president of the association.
"And that the investigators developed the film and reviewed the notes is an outrage," Hawes added.
U.S. Sen. Mark Hatfield (R-Ore.) wrote to the head of the Forrest Service to register concern over the incident and to ask the agency to review its rules regarding news coverage of protests.
"Because protests are often of great interest to the public and the media, the policies and procedures for how law enforcement officials should deal with members of the press should be clear," Hatfield wrote.