Court Opinion

ID: 9861425
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 23:59:03.770968+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:28:25.669510
License: Public Domain

GIVAN, Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in this case. I believe the Court of Appeals' opinion to be correct and would adopt it in its entirety. See State v. Heltzel (1989), Ind.App., 588 N.E.2d 159, reh'g. denied, Ind.App., 585 N.E.2d 1221.
At page five of its opinion, the majority concedes that what the reporters did in this case in fact was a crime. Nevertheless, they hold that because the act occurred long after the grand jury had been discharged, the interest of gathering news overrode the interest of the State in preserving inviolate the grand jury proceedings.
I cannot agree with such a rationalization. Protecting First Amendment rights is always of paramount consideration. However, when members of the news media flagrantly commit a crime to gather news and, as in this case, deliberately mislead the former grand jurors in an endeay- or to persuade them to consent to be interviewed, it is a wholly intolerable situation. For that reason, I would deny transfer in this case.
PIVARNIK, J., concurs.