Grand Jury Subpoena MEDIA VIDEOS

[shay0903]

http://www.necn.com/10/11/11/TV-sta...n.html?&apID=d42b5016bf0f4f78b73eb6fa0be87918

Oct 11, 2011 1:46pm

IMO- this is kinda sad....I understand there is always legal/politics involved but this is a BABY! Its sort of frustrating that they are refusing to turn over the raw stuff. Its not like they are pinging them...they are trying to help find her! Come on reporters you help us by keeping us all informed...help baby lisa and turn it over to help find her!!

 

[Donjeta]

http://www.necn.com/10/11/11/TV-sta...n.html?&apID=d42b5016bf0f4f78b73eb6fa0be87918

Oct 11, 2011 1:46pm
An executive at a Kansas City, Mo., TV station says it will turn over all of the footage it has aired about the case of a missing 10-month-old girl.
But Bryan McGruder of WDAF says the station won't hand over any of its unaired raw footage, because workers "routinely recycle" what they use.

What does this mean? Recycle? Did they already tape over the footage they didn't choose to air?

 

[TexasLil]

What does this mean? Recycle? Did they already tape over the footage they didn't choose to air?

I took it as meaning they routinely go back through old footage they haven't aired if they are looking for something to use at a future date with a new article.

 

[Donjeta]

So, if grand jury subpoenaes you, you can just say, nuh-oh, I won't, if you don't feel like it?

 

[elepher50]

What does this mean? Recycle? Did they already tape over the footage they didn't choose to air?

Yes, imo, they recycle the media used for storing the footage that has been shot. I am surprised that they didn't backup the footage to another storage medium prior to wiping the media clean but they apparently didn't....:waitasec:

I have read that raw footage is normally kept for about 7 days and the storage medium is recycled. So requesting the raw video yesterday was quite timely.

 

[TexasLil]

So, if grand jury subpoenaes you, you can just say, nuh-oh, I won't, if you don't feel like it?

I honestly don't see how they could deny the subpoena. That was just my interpretation of what they stated about recycling.

 

[Peliman]

Yes, imo, they recycle the media used for storing the footage that has been shot. I am surprised that they didn't backup the footage to another storage medium prior to wiping the media clean but they apparently didn't....:waitasec:

I have read that raw footage is normally kept for about 7 days and the storage medium is recycled. So requesting the raw video yesterday was quite timely.

Hmm, raw footage is recycled, used again, copied over. I can't speak for all news station practices, only where I worked. Raw footage after being cut/edited and made into a news story to be aired, only the edited story was copied to a master library video, stored in a video room.

There might be 7-15 minutes of raw video for what's known as a news package. Generally a package is 1 1/2 minutes on air. The rest of the raw footage is copied over for new stories of some type.

So 15 mins of raw video could be copied over and the public only see's 1 1/2 min. of it. The station I worked for tried keeping raw footage 5-7 days before re-use. Stations elsewhere may use a different poilcy for raw footage.

Not sure if that helps or not. :dunno:

 

[curiousc]

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/229...-investigate-kansas-city-well-reenactment.htm

R. Michael Cassidy, a professor at Boston College Law School, told MSNBC there could be several reasons for seeking the footage -- including an attempt to identify inconsistencies in Lisa's parents' accounts of the events surrounding her disappearance.

"It could mean that they have one or both of the parents as suspects, and they are developing evidence of everything they said in the past and prior to the arrest," Cassidy told MSNBC Tuesday. "To show that someone's story has shifted over time can also be very damning."

 

[Deleted member 718]

If I were on the grand jury, I'd very much want to see raw unedited film instead of a reporter's edited version.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

What exactly is LE looking for in these videos? Has national media also received a subpoena or just local media? I'd like to use this thread to gather the videos we've seen thus far and try to determine exactly what LE might be looking for.
This is the first video where Jeremy & Debbie discuss what took place when Jeremy got home, it's also the video in which the cell phones were first mentioned.
http://www.kctv5.com/video?clipId=6323797&autostart=true

Something interesting the reporter asks in this video...would Lisa cry if woken up? JI answers, "yes...", but DB completely talks over him, saying she probably wouldn't cry. DB keeps looking at JI while she's talking over him.

 

[Boodles]

I don't know if this is mainstream, but they refer to AP and the local stations.

Several local stations are refusing to provide raw video? WTH? There is a baby missing! I hope this isn't valid.
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvspy/ka...-with-investigators-in-lisa-irwin-case_b25160

 

[Dr.Fessel]

I don't know if this is mainstream, but they refer to AP and the local stations.

Several local stations are refusing to provide raw video? WTH? There is a baby missing! I hope this isn't valid.
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvspy/ka...-with-investigators-in-lisa-irwin-case_b25160

We need some of our legal minds to weigh in on this.

After receiving grand jury subpoenas requesting that they share video footage connected to the disappearance of 10-month-old Lisa Irwin, Kansas City stations plan to cooperate with investigators but are making an important distinction: they will submit footage that has aired but will not hand over raw footage, as the Clay County prosecutor’s office has requested.

Jim Roberts, a spokesman for the prosecutor’s office, told the Associated Press this week that the subpoenas were intended to prevent KMBC, KCTV, KSHB, and WDAF from discarding footage of the girl’s family and neighbors.

KCTV and KSHB were both ordered to bring their raw footage to the Clay County courthouse next Tuesday. Both stations are now being represented by attorney Bernard J. Rhodes, who told the Kansas City Star that he referred authorities to a video clipping service that the stations use and a list of stories that have been aired.

While KCTV and KSHB, as well as KMBC, have so far declined to comment publicly on the matter, WDAF news director Bryan McGruder has been pointed in his response to the subpoenas.

“We comply with all subpoenas,” McGruder said, “but we do not release raw material.”

 

[Pensfan]

We need some of our legal minds to weigh in on this.

After receiving grand jury subpoenas requesting that they share video footage connected to the disappearance of 10-month-old Lisa Irwin, Kansas City stations plan to cooperate with investigators but are making an important distinction: they will submit footage that has aired but will not hand over raw footage, as the Clay County prosecutor’s office has requested.

Jim Roberts, a spokesman for the prosecutor’s office, told the Associated Press this week that the subpoenas were intended to prevent KMBC, KCTV, KSHB, and WDAF from discarding footage of the girl’s family and neighbors.

KCTV and KSHB were both ordered to bring their raw footage to the Clay County courthouse next Tuesday. Both stations are now being represented by attorney Bernard J. Rhodes, who told the Kansas City Star that he referred authorities to a video clipping service that the stations use and a list of stories that have been aired.

While KCTV and KSHB, as well as KMBC, have so far declined to comment publicly on the matter, WDAF news director Bryan McGruder has been pointed in his response to the subpoenas.

“We comply with all subpoenas,” McGruder said, “but we do not release raw material.”

Reporters' privilege? Read more here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporters'_privilege

"The United States Department of Justice created self-imposed guidelines intended to protect the news media by regulating the use of subpoenas against the press. These guidelines state that "all reasonable attempts should be made to obtain information from alternative sources” after considering issuing a subpoena to a member of the news media."

 

[momtective]

I have searched and searched for one video in particular and I haven't found it. I saw it on the very first day Lisa was reported missing and the reporter was interviewing a young man, possible teenaged. I just wonder if maybe this is the main video they are seeking.

 

[jjenny]

Reporters' privilege? Read more here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporters'_privilege

"The United States Department of Justice created self-imposed guidelines intended to protect the news media by regulating the use of subpoenas against the press. These guidelines state that "all reasonable attempts should be made to obtain information from alternative sources” after considering issuing a subpoena to a member of the news media."

Well there are no reasonable way to obtain raw footage from alternative sources.

 

[jjenny]

We need some of our legal minds to weigh in on this.

After receiving grand jury subpoenas requesting that they share video footage connected to the disappearance of 10-month-old Lisa Irwin, Kansas City stations plan to cooperate with investigators but are making an important distinction: they will submit footage that has aired but will not hand over raw footage, as the Clay County prosecutor’s office has requested.

Jim Roberts, a spokesman for the prosecutor’s office, told the Associated Press this week that the subpoenas were intended to prevent KMBC, KCTV, KSHB, and WDAF from discarding footage of the girl’s family and neighbors.

KCTV and KSHB were both ordered to bring their raw footage to the Clay County courthouse next Tuesday. Both stations are now being represented by attorney Bernard J. Rhodes, who told the Kansas City Star that he referred authorities to a video clipping service that the stations use and a list of stories that have been aired.

While KCTV and KSHB, as well as KMBC, have so far declined to comment publicly on the matter, WDAF news director Bryan McGruder has been pointed in his response to the subpoenas.

“We comply with all subpoenas,” McGruder said, “but we do not release raw material.”

That doesn't make sense because they want raw footage. So how not releasing raw footage equal complying with all the subpoenas?

 

[vlpate]

I have searched and searched for one video in particular and I haven't found it. I saw it on the very first day Lisa was reported missing and the reporter was interviewing a young man, possible teenaged. I just wonder if maybe this is the main video they are seeking.

I've had that happen before and it will make you crazy. Do you see it on TV or on one of the online media outlets? I'll try to help you find it.

 

[yllek]

On a different thread, a poster stated that the GJ is being convened for the purpose of seeing the raw videos. I thought that the raw videos were subpoened as something to be shown to the Grand Jury, who would be called upon to consider various pieces of potential evidence and decide if there is sufficient cause to move forward with legal action against anyone(s).

Can someone clarify? TIA!!!!!

 

[raeann]

On a different thread, a poster stated that the GJ is being convened for the purpose of seeing the raw videos. I thought that the raw videos were subpoened as something to be shown to the Grand Jury, who would be called upon to consider various pieces of potential evidence and decide if there is sufficient cause to move forward with legal action against anyone(s).

Can someone clarify? TIA!!!!!

Yes, the media are VERY reluctant to ever turn over any of their raw video, notes etc. It is a freedom of the press thing, and it is very rare that they would turn over the video without this kind of measure. Having a GJ demand that they turn over the items also releases them from various kinds of liability issues.

jmo

 

[CocoChanel]

On a different thread, a poster stated that the GJ is being convened for the purpose of seeing the raw videos. I thought that the raw videos were subpoened as something to be shown to the Grand Jury, who would be called upon to consider various pieces of potential evidence and decide if there is sufficient cause to move forward with legal action against anyone(s).

Can someone clarify? TIA!!!!!

It is possible that one grand jury issued the subpoenas to collect the videos, while another grand jury will decide on an indictment when the DA is ready to present the evidence they have against the intended target. It is also possible that the grand jury being asked to indict may or may not actually view the video even if it's used as evidence. The grand jury can rely on testimony from a LE agent regarding what was found on the video without actually seeing the video themselves. That probably doesn't answer your question above, but maybe helps explain a small part of what might go on inside the grand jury room.