|
Zakreski also wrote features
on Martensville and
the Foster Parent
Scandal, both of which were severely hampered by publication
bans. | FASD | Sarah
Gibb feature Where angels fear to tread
Dan Zakreski
Dan Zakreski: As a profession
it's going to be very interesting because it poses some very
serious problems for us if the judgment stands. If confronted
with something like that in the future do we take our stories
to the judiciary for vetting, to ask a judge 'Is this what you
really meant? It seems obvious but we don't really know.'
background
stories to Zakreski charges
| Serena Nicotine
| censorship | publication bans
| Vopni family: a different kind of censorship
| Leon Walchuk: one-sided
reporting leading to wrongful conviction | Robert
Mitchell: Justice minister who violated a ban |
SP found guilty of violating
publication ban
Lana Haight, The StarPhoenix,
January 04, 2003
The StarPhoenix was found guilty
Friday of violating a publication ban after publishing a November
1999 article that included details of how Helen Montgomery was
murdered in her North Battleford home.
Judge Mary Ellen Wright fined
the newspaper $3,500, plus a 20 per cent victims' surcharge.
Dan Zakreski, a former StarPhoenix
reporter who wrote the story, was also found guilty, but was
given an absolute discharge with no conditions attached.
This means he will not have
a criminal record.
"I get to tell my kids
'Dad's not going to jail.' That's a big thing. I never thought
I was, but try to explain that to your family," said Zakreski
outside Queen's Bench Court in Saskatoon.
Friday's decision was handed
down in Saskatoon after a two-day trial in Battleford last month.
More than three years ago,
Zakreski wrote a lengthy article about fetal
alcohol syndrome and the justice system. As part of the story,
Zakreski provided a brief description of how Montgomery, who
ran an open custody home, was stabbed to death by notorious teenage
killer Serena Nicotine and another teenage girl.
Nicotine had been diagnosed
with fetal alcohol syndrome. The story acknowledged that a publication
ban prevented publication of exactly what happened the night
Montgomery died because the case against Nicotine's co-accused
was not resolved.
Zakreski and The StarPhoenix
maintained the publication ban did not cover the details included
in the story because Zakreski learned of the information at an
earlier court hearing and through interviews he conducted.
But in her written judgment,
Justice Wright said the facts subject to the publication ban
"were identical in virtually all respects" to the details
in the news story.
She further said that the spirit
and intent of the publication ban were clear -- "to ensure
a fair trial for the co-accused and to avoid the potential contamination
of any jury pool." By publishing some of the details of
Montgomery's murder, Wright said the co-accused's right to a
fair trial may have been at stake.
Nonetheless, Wright praised
Zakreski's story, calling it an "excellent article"
that brought to the public's attention the issue of fetal alcohol
syndrome.
The co-accused, Catherine Mackenzie,
never did stand trial, opting instead to plead guilty to second-degree
murder. She and Nicotine are serving life sentences for Montgomery's
murder.
Zakreski, while relieved with
the absolute discharge, said in court before sentencing that
he has found the process to be "professionally frustrating"
and admitted that he still struggles with what he should have
done differently.
"I still don't get it,"
he said outside the court. "We didn't agonize over (the
story). It wasn't a judgment call. It was just a story and that
was an element of the story. We believed we were respecting the
order and the judge thought otherwise," he added.
Crown prosecutor Dan O'Hanlon,
who asked the judge to fine The StarPhoenix $5,000 plus the victims'
surcharge, agreed with Zakreski's absolute discharge. He said
the fine will serve as a deterrent to the media when tempted
to breach publication bans.
"Madam Justice Wright's
decision said the decision by The StarPhoenix was in conjunction
with Mr. Zakreski but they had the ultimate responsibility,"
he said outside the court house.
Defence lawyer Grant Currie,
who said the newspaper and Zakreski were not surprisingly disappointed,
believes this decision will have a negative effect on court reporting
because it will be more difficult to determine which information
is covered by a publication ban.
"It is necessarily going
to require the members of the media to take a second look and
maybe a third look and to take some calculated risks as to whether
they can go ahead and publish certain information," he said
after the decision was rendered.
Zakreski, a reporter in Saskatchewan
for more than 20 years who now works for the Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation, agreed.
"As a profession it's
going to be very interesting because it poses some very serious
problems for us if the judgment stands. If confronted with something
like that in the future do we take our stories to the judiciary
for vetting, to ask a judge 'Is this what you really meant? It
seems obvious but we don't really know.'
"I don't think it was
the intent of the court to scare us away from covering things
but that's the financial reality today if you're talking fines,"
he said.
O'Hanlon said publication bans
are to be expected and Friday's judgment was clear.
"The message it sends
is that when a court makes an order it has to be adhered to.
I think as well if an order is not understood then the court
should be consulted for direction or clarification," he
said. Zakreski
also wrote features on Martensville
and the Foster Parent
Scandal, both of which were severely hampered by publication
bans.
Jason Warick ran into snags
with Klassens await
day in court.
The Big
Iceberg:To this day no
one has tackled Social Services, whose workers have amazing powers.
While many social workers are ethical people doing the best they
can under trying conditions, some abuse their power to apprehend
children, others hae been known to manufacture evidence, hiding
behind court orders. They also have the power to seal or release
files at will, knowing the courts will back them up. Susan
Paseika, Liz Newton, Diane
Ens and Carol Bunko-Ruys
are two who should be seriously looked at.
|
Truth can never be
told so as to be understood, and not be believ'd. William Blake, The Proverbs of Hell
