'(
7KXUVGD\ -XQH A&E
FEATURE
SPORTS
6SDFH &DSRQH WR SOD\ DW WKH À UVW 6XQVHW &RQFHUW
2USKDQ HSLGHPLF LQ +DLWL
&HQWHU RIIHUV PRUH WKDQ D ZRUNRXW
'DLO\ (J\SWLDQ
3$*(
3$*(
3$*(
6LQFH
ZZZ GDLO\HJ\SWLDQ FRP
9ROXPH ,VVXH SDJHV
Campus gardener has Himalayan roots
Radha Dhumgel, of Nepal, talks Wednesday about the variety of vegetables she and other residents produce in garden plots at Evergreen Terrace Apartments. Dhumgel grows beans, squash and lettuce but said her favorite vegetables to grow are tomatoes. STEVE MATZKER DAILY EGYPTIAN
Police raid Kirkwood’s home for recordings TARA KULASH Daily Egyptian Police raided Kevin Kirkwood’s home and seized his cell phone after he was quoted in the Daily Egyptian as saying he recorded a meeting with thenMayor Brad Cole. Kirkwood, owner of the Ice Box Bar and Grill, allegedly recorded the meeting without Cole’s knowledge or consent. Kirkwood said the meeting dealt with how to secure the liquor license he wanted for his restaurant. The article, titled “Ice Box Bar and Grill Receives Liquor License,� was printed June 1. In it, Kirkwood said, “I had one meeting with (Cole) that I actually recorded.� Kirkwood said he was presented with a search warrant June 7. Carbondale police confirmed there was a search for the recording, which was not found, but wouldn’t comment further on the case. Cole refused to comment, and the police report of the search was not yet on public record. It is unlikely that a police report would be unavailable for public use, said Frank LoMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center. “Even for an ongoing case, there’s going to be an initial incident report,� LoMonte said. “It should be available for a reporter unless it would compromise an ongoing investigation, which in this case, it wouldn’t. Very few crimes get cleared within the first day or two, so
they’re all open investigations.� Police asked a Daily Egyptian reporter for a recording of the Kirkwood interview, but the newspaper refused, citing Illinois’ shield law. This law bars government officials from the obtainment of such materials from reporters unless the officials can show they have exhausted all other means of obtaining the information and that disclosure of it is essential to the public. Police said they intend to seek either a search warrant for the DE newsroom or a subpoena ordering the newspaper to hand over the recording. Faculty Managing Editor Eric Fidler said the DE would fight any order to turn over the recording. “While we have great respect for the men and women who serve in law enforcement, no news organization can allow itself to become an arm of the police,� he said. “Sources - confidential or not - must be able to speak freely to reporters without fear that anything they say can end up in the hands of the police.� He said the newspaper’s student leadership, its professional advisers and the director of the School of Journalism agreed that the paper’s staff would not hinder any attempt to search the newsroom but would not help either. “Government interference in the news-gathering process is a very serious matter that can be justified only in exceptional circumstances,� Fidler said. “After speaking with our attorney and
reviewing the statute, I believe this case does not meet the standards set by Illinois law and that a search of the newsroom would violate the federal Privacy Protection Act.� LoMonte said he doesn’t think the DE’s recording would help the investigation, anyway. “The fact of the matter is (Kirkwood’s) acknowledgement to (the DE) that he made this recording is not even actual evidence. It’s hearsay,� he said. The charge Kirkwood faces, eavesdropping, is a Class 4 felony in Illinois. Illinois has one of the most restrictive eavesdropping laws in the country, which states that both parties must consent to being recorded. The crime is punishable by one to three years in prison on a first offense. Further charges would apply if Kirkwood made the tape public, which he hasn’t. In fact, Kirkwood retracted his statement and later said there was never a recording in the first place. He said he meant he recorded the conversation with Cole mentally rather than electronically. “I’m saying I did not (record the conversation),� Kirkwood said. “I have a mental recording of every conversation that I have, especially dealing with this liquor license situation.� Kirkwood said shortly after the article was published, two officers showed up at his barbershop, Illusions, and gave the impression they needed his help. He said Lt. Stan Reno told him an inves-
tigation was being conducted on Cole for corruption and they needed his assistance. Kirkwood said he received a phone call a few days later from Reno in which the lieutenant asked for an SD card that contained the recording. “I told them, ‘I don’t know where it’s at. I can’t find it,’ because in all actuality, there wasn’t a real recording of me and Brad talking,� Kirkwood said. After another officer, Sgt. Matt Dunning, called Kirkwood days later to request the card again, Kirkwood said he told Dunning he was instructed by his lawyer not to comment. “Four hours later, he came to the barbershop with a search warrant, took my phone and said the search warrant was being brought to me for eavesdropping,� Kirkwood said. Upon arriving home, Kirkwood said he saw 15 to 20 officers raiding his house. “They tore my house up,� he said. “They threw my daughter’s toys everywhere.� He said the police seized his son’s cell phone, Kirkwood’s cell phone, two USB drives and an iPod. The Privacy Protection Act that defends newsrooms from searches was put into effect because of another university newspaper, the Stanford Daily at Stanford University. The case, which took place from 1972-1978, was titled Zurcher v. Stanford Daily. William Freivogel, director of the School of Journalism at SIU, said he worked at the Stanford pa-
per at the time of the case. “There had been quite a number of demonstrations (on campus), and there was fear that the Santa Clara County sheriffs had said they might try to get negatives of Stanford Daily photographs to try to prove who had done illegal things at the protest,� Freivogel said. He said police searched and obtained photographs they thought could be used as evidence after a demonstration at the medical school. The Stanford Daily fought it all the way to the Supreme Court. When the court ruled that neither the First nor the Fourth Amendments protected newsrooms from a search warrant, Freivogel said there was a negative reaction from mainstream media. As a result, the Privacy Protection Act was passed by Congress in 1980, which made it a violation of federal law for authorities to search newsrooms. The two main exceptions to this act would be if the reporter was involved in a crime or if seizing the documents would prevent death or serious harm to another. “One reason that’s important is when a prosecutor goes to a judge to try to get a search warrant, the news organization wouldn’t have the chance to contest it in court,� Freivogel said. “But a subpoena gives the news organization a chance to contest and say that it shouldn’t have to turn over the document.� Freivogel said it is the Daily Egyptian’s view that the Illinois shield law will protect its recording of Kirkwood.