Full Version: What should be done about blabbermouths?
"DENVER - The tuberculosis patient under the first federal quarantine since 1963 is a 31-year-old personal injury attorney who practices law with his father in Atlanta, a federal law enforcement official said Thursday.
The official, who asked to remain anonymous because he was not authorized to talk about the case, identified the patient as {DELETED NAME}. A medical official in Atlanta also confirmed the name on condition of anonymity."
The foregoing was culled from a news story on Yahoo. This man, think what you will of him, will now be hounded by the press and subject to God-knows-how-many threats and possible harm.
Our question for debate:
What should happen to law enforcement officials and others who clearly break their own rules on non-disclosure of information like this?
The official, who asked to remain anonymous because he was not authorized to talk about the case, identified the patient as {DELETED NAME}. A medical official in Atlanta also confirmed the name on condition of anonymity."
The foregoing was culled from a news story on Yahoo. This man, think what you will of him, will now be hounded by the press and subject to God-knows-how-many threats and possible harm.
Our question for debate:
What should happen to law enforcement officials and others who clearly break their own rules on non-disclosure of information like this?
What should happen to law enforcement officials and others who clearly break their own rules on non-disclosure of information like this?
Very little can be done. I suppose if the law enforcement officials who revealed this info were uncovered, the department(s) could censure them in some way (leave without pay or firing or strikes on their records). Legally, I think they are in the clear unless it can be shown that revealing the name is not under the rubric of free speech.
As far as "should" is concerned, I wouldn't want to make laws preventing law enforcement from talking to the press. First, it would be unconstitutional; second, it would curb the check-and-balance the press serves on the government. The risk is, of course, that some information gets revealed that arguably ought not to have been revealed (at least at that time). So be it. I'd rather err on the side of too much information than too little.
Very little can be done. I suppose if the law enforcement officials who revealed this info were uncovered, the department(s) could censure them in some way (leave without pay or firing or strikes on their records). Legally, I think they are in the clear unless it can be shown that revealing the name is not under the rubric of free speech.
As far as "should" is concerned, I wouldn't want to make laws preventing law enforcement from talking to the press. First, it would be unconstitutional; second, it would curb the check-and-balance the press serves on the government. The risk is, of course, that some information gets revealed that arguably ought not to have been revealed (at least at that time). So be it. I'd rather err on the side of too much information than too little.
What should happen to law enforcement officials and others who clearly break their own rules on non-disclosure of information like this?
Though I have a hard time feeling any sympathy for the man who endangered lord-knows-how many people across several countries, if the official broke any department policy or rule he should be disciplined according to that policy.
I'd already read that the man with TB was an attorney. He has already called the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and if Robert Daniels (the guy in AZ under quarantine) is any indication, he'll be a media whore soon enough. Already he is disputing the CDC's statement that he was specifically told NOT to fly. Yuh-huh, I believe that, 'specially coming from an attorney!
Edited to add these items I read today:
I lost the source for this one (trust me
), but I thought it summed up "TB Man" nicely.
Though I have a hard time feeling any sympathy for the man who endangered lord-knows-how many people across several countries, if the official broke any department policy or rule he should be disciplined according to that policy.
I'd already read that the man with TB was an attorney. He has already called the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and if Robert Daniels (the guy in AZ under quarantine) is any indication, he'll be a media whore soon enough. Already he is disputing the CDC's statement that he was specifically told NOT to fly. Yuh-huh, I believe that, 'specially coming from an attorney!
Edited to add these items I read today:
QUOTE
The man, reportedly an attorney whose name has not been released, was finally nabbed after he returned to North America and was driving from Montreal to Atlanta in an attempt to circumvent a 'no-fly' order. M&C
I lost the source for this one (trust me
), but I thought it summed up "TB Man" nicely.QUOTE
But another expert, Dr. Richard P. Wenzel, president of the international society for infectious diseases, called the patient “grossly irresponsible.”
“It’s irresponsible in active tuberculosis for anyone to be on an airplane — whether it’s multi-resistant or not,” said Dr. Wenzel, an infectious disease expert at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond.
“It’s irresponsible in active tuberculosis for anyone to be on an airplane — whether it’s multi-resistant or not,” said Dr. Wenzel, an infectious disease expert at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond.
WE, as a nation, have clearly thrown the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to confidentiality. I can not even try to count how many murderers and pedophiles are given a "pass" under laws of confideniality. I would seriously say the most dangerous laws to public safety in the nation are confidentiality laws- I shudder how many millions of bad guys walk the street day to day without any oversite, and commit crimes over and over, without any repurcussions at all- except for maybe a year or two of in-patient hospital stay in a state facility- maybe a year of any kind of restrictions of any of thier rights.
WE need to desperately need to re-write the confidentality laws in this nation to subject the public safety to less harm. Accusation of a felony crime or not following quaritine laws should subject the person to public scrutiny- even publish thier picture in the paper.
WE need to desperately need to re-write the confidentality laws in this nation to subject the public safety to less harm. Accusation of a felony crime or not following quaritine laws should subject the person to public scrutiny- even publish thier picture in the paper.
Last night, before I turned off the TV after CSI, a promo for Good Morning America aired, confirming my suspicion about TB Man (aka Andrew Speaker) :
Helloo, media whoredom! Now he has his mug plastered all over TV and the web. Who's the blabbermouth now?
QUOTE
Diane Sawyer has landed an exclusive interview with the globe-trotting TB patient for Friday's "Good Morning America."
Suggested question: What were you thinking?
Sawyer's full interview with Andrew Speaker will be shown on "GMA," starting at 7 a.m. on WFTV-Channel 9. Speaker is a 31-year-old Atlanta lawyer who ignored the Centers for Disease Control, which advised him not to travel. Orlando Sentinel
Suggested question: What were you thinking?
Sawyer's full interview with Andrew Speaker will be shown on "GMA," starting at 7 a.m. on WFTV-Channel 9. Speaker is a 31-year-old Atlanta lawyer who ignored the Centers for Disease Control, which advised him not to travel. Orlando Sentinel
Helloo, media whoredom! Now he has his mug plastered all over TV and the web. Who's the blabbermouth now?
QUOTE
Our question for debate:
What should happen to law enforcement officials and others who clearly break their own rules on non-disclosure of information like this?
What should happen to law enforcement officials and others who clearly break their own rules on non-disclosure of information like this?
Little can and has been done about much more serious leaks of classified material to the press – who feel it is their duty to :”get the story” regardless to what id does to national security and peoples lives.
Compared to the leak that gave away to AQ our ability to track cell phones this is very minor.
To do anything at all one has to go after the “leaker” and put him/her in jail.
Don’t hold your breath.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/07/hoekstra072505.html
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.