Print

Mail

wiki links

Journalists could be witnesses in CIA probe

In the witness box: * `New York Times' reporter Judith Miller * `Time' magazine reporter Matthew Cooper * NBC Washington bureau chief Tim Russert * As many as seven more journalists

Some journalists who made careers out of questioning government officials and bearing witness to history may soon find themselves answering questions from prosecutors as key witnesses in a CIA leak case.

Ten or more reporters from some of the most prominent news organizations could be called to testify in the perjury and obstruction case of former White House aide Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

It is rare enough for reporters to become witnesses.

But the Libby case is even more unusual because journalists will be dueling witnesses -- some called by the defense team, some by prosecutors.

"It will be unprecedented and, as far as I'm concerned, horrifying," Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters' Committee for Freedom of the Press, said of the case, for which jury selection begins in two weeks.

Prosecutors want to show that Libby lied to investigators about his conversations with journalists regarding outed CIA officer Valerie Plame. They are expected to rely on former New York Times reporter Judith Miller, Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper and NBC Washington bureau chief Tim Russert to make their case.

Libby, the former top aide to US Vice President Dick Cheney, has said he had no reason to lie and simply did not remember those conversations.

His attorneys have said they will call as many as seven unidentified journalists to testify about their conversations with Libby to bolster his case.

The Libby case has rankled news agencies for nearly three years, since special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald began subpoenaing journalists to testify before a grand jury.

Fitzgerald said it was the only way he could thoroughly investigate whether any laws were broken.

After a lengthy court fight that included an 85-day jail term for Miller, Fitzgerald won cooperation from journalists.

When Libby was indicted, it was clear reporters would be key witnesses. That puts them in the awkward position of aiding a criminal investigation, something journalism groups say erodes the wall between the government and an independent press.

Plame's identity was first revealed by syndicated columnist Robert Novak.

She believes she was outed as retribution for her husband's criticism of the Bush administration's prewar intelligence on Iraq.

Jurors likely will not hear much about the leak itself because the original source, former deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage, has already confirmed his role and Libby is not charged with the leak.

But the trial is certain to renew questions about whether the administration used reporters to drum up support for the war.

Roy Peter Clark of the Poynter Institute said he worries about the fallout of the trial.

If it is perceived that reporters grant anonymity to officials engaged in political gamesmanship, prosecutors are more likely to subpoena them in cases where anonymity was granted in serious issues of public importance.

"This case, it's magnified by the fact that it's in Washington and the status of the players," Clark said. "It's a bizarre and I'd say dangerous case."
This story has been viewed 1656 times.