Kit - Chapter 22 - Spoilers

[Mad Monk]

Somehow I think that there could still be more Police pressure about the article.

Allison and Sheila should make a good combination - I can see embarasment ahead for Jessie.

[Mizriath]

Thanks Fel.

Hmm,

I think the birth of a new media empire starting and then Vil putting the running of the whole shipyard to Kit.!!


I am waiting with anticipation for UNIFICATION.

[Fel]

Somehow I think that there could still be more Police pressure about the article.

Allison and Sheila should make a good combination - I can see embarasment ahead for Jessie.

Yeah, the increasing pressure comes later. That was the "play nice" attempt. The "we own you" part has yet to come.

As to Jessie getting embarrassed, think about it. That's not really Allison's style. She's not really like that, it was just a role she played. But, she's also relatively fearless, and she's not going to stop Sheila from being Sheila either...so perhaps there is the possibility for a little "Jessie baiting" in the future, especially since Allison knows Jessie is jealous of her.

[Mizriath]

I did wonder whether Kit will pick up like Jason .... having extra buddies... nah this is straight laced animal story...

[IdiotPaste]

Here's a question. The police can't make Kit divulge Allison's identity because he's a journalist. But Jessie was there when he interviewed her, so if the police found out that Jessie was there could they compel her to reveal the information? Or is Allison no longer considered a confidential source since Jessie was there to hear the interview?

That would be something, Kits pregnant wife thrown in jail for withholding information from a police investigation. That would put Kit in quite a pickle. Not to mention how Hannah would react or even Vil.

[Fel]

Here's a question. The police can't make Kit divulge Allison's identity because he's a journalist. But Jessie was there when he interviewed her, so if the police found out that Jessie was there could they compel her to reveal the information? Or is Allison no longer considered a confidential source since Jessie was there to hear the interview?

That would be something, Kits pregnant wife thrown in jail for withholding information from a police investigation. That would put Kit in quite a pickle. Not to mention how Hannah would react or even Vil.

Technically, that's a proper interpretation of the law, and if the police knew she was present at the interview, they might try it....

BUT.

Jessie has two legal defenses.

First, Jessie could claim spousal privilege, the right of a spouse to keep the secrets of the other spouse when communicated in a private or inimate manner and not meant to be divulged. This would be a weak argument because of the presence of Allison when Kit got the information (they'd know she was there if they knew Jessie was party to the interview), because then it blurs the distinction between spousal privilege and journalist/source privilege, but she could try it. It would depend on the interpretation of the law by the judge to determine how that one would come out.

Second, and much harder for the police to circumvent, Jessie is listed as a staff member of the magazine, listed as a "contributor," which has an ambiguous meaning. She's an employee, therefore, she can claim to be a journalist. She, too, could claim a journalist's privilege to refuse to answer questions. If they can't force Kit to answer questions, they can't force Jessie to do it either, for the exact same reasons. All Kit has to do is claim Jessie was an uncredited assistant to the creation of the article, and she then enjoys the same protections (and vulnerabilities) as the byline authors.

And, (spoiler), her involvement with the magazine will be increasing, very soon.

[Mad Monk]

Here's a question. The police can't make Kit divulge Allison's identity because he's a journalist. But Jessie was there when he interviewed her, so if the police found out that Jessie was there could they compel her to reveal the information? Or is Allison no longer considered a confidential source since Jessie was there to hear the interview?

That would be something, Kits pregnant wife thrown in jail for withholding information from a police investigation. That would put Kit in quite a pickle. Not to mention how Hannah would react or even Vil.

Apart from Fel's legal points, what do you think will happen if the pregnant wife of a journalist is locked up to try to force him to reveal his sources? Sources linked to a human interest story, which is being reprinted nationally? Especially in an election year?

Unless things operate substantially differently in Texas than in England, the Commissioner of Police would soon be looking for a new job, and I would not be surprised if Jessie could be entitled to substantial compensation.

[dellstart]

That's a interest question.Where does one start and the other stop.

So decided to do a Wikipedia search, and see what comes up.Here's a brief summery of the topic.

Reporters' Privilege is the qualified (limited) First Amendment right many jurisdictions by statutory law or judicial decision have given to journalists in protecting their confidential sources from discovery.


Department of Justice Guidelines

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” before considering issuing a subpoena to a member of the news media. Furthermore, the guidelines require that federal prosecutors negotiate with the press, explaining the specific needs of the case.

Before any subpoena may be issued, the attorney general must approve the issuance. The attorney general’s review for a subpoena to a member of the news media shall be based on the following criteria:

* In criminal cases, there should be reasonable grounds to believe, based on information obtained from non-media sources, that a crime has occurred, and that the information sought is essential to a successful investigation--particularly with reference to directly establishing guilt or innocence. The subpoena should not be used to obtain peripheral, nonessential, or speculative information.

* In civil cases there should be reasonable grounds, based on non-media sources, to believe that the information sought is essential to the successful completion of the litigation in a case of substantial importance. The subpoena should not be used to obtain peripheral, nonessential, or speculative information.

* The government should have unsuccessfully attempted to obtain the information from alternative non-media sources.

* The use of subpoenas to members of the news media should, except under exigent circumstances, be limited to the verification of published information and to such surrounding circumstances as relate to the accuracy of the published information.

* Even subpoena authorization requests for publicly disclosed information should be treated with care to avoid claims of harassment.

* Subpoenas should, wherever possible, be directed at material information regarding a limited subject matter, should cover a reasonably limited period of time, and should avoid requiring production of a large volume of unpublished material. They should give reasonable and timely notice of the demand for documents.

While these guidelines seem extremely protective of the press, they explicitly deny the creation of “any legally enforceable right in any person.” Nor does the policy have any substantive punishment for the federal government violations. If the federal prosecutors fail to obtain approval from the attorney general, the extent of the authorized punishment is “an administrative reprimand or other appropriate disciplinary action.” In fact, some courts have found that the guidelines “create no enforceable right.”Therefore, in circuits taking this approach, the news media have no right to appeal for enforcement of these policies before being compelled to testify.




As for Spousal privilege,, its pretty much as fel has stated.One can not be called to testify against a spouse,unless its a case of child custody or domestic abuse.

Dunno if the above changes anything , but it gives a clear picture of Kit's rights as a reporter.

[Mad Monk]

Apart from anything else, it might also be interesting if they chase any Ferrets that Kit may have met recently - Denise Jacobs, who would probably have more than a few words to say, and the Dean of the University.

[IdiotPaste]

Second, and much harder for the police to circumvent, Jessie is listed as a staff member of the magazine, listed as a "contributor," which has an ambiguous meaning. She's an employee, therefore, she can claim to be a journalist. She, too, could claim a journalist's privilege to refuse to answer questions. If they can't force Kit to answer questions, they can't force Jessie to do it either, for the exact same reasons. All Kit has to do is claim Jessie was an uncredited assistant to the creation of the article, and she then enjoys the same protections (and vulnerabilities) as the byline authors.

I didn't think of Jessie claiming journalist status, that's a good point.

Apart from Fel's legal points, what do you think will happen if the pregnant wife of a journalist is locked up to try to force him to reveal his sources? Sources linked to a human interest story, which is being reprinted nationally? Especially in an election year?

Unless things operate substantially differently in Texas than in England, the Commissioner of Police would soon be looking for a new job, and I would not be surprised if Jessie could be entitled to substantial compensation.

I don't know, they could easily play it as a soon-to-be mother protecting a dangerous criminal enterprise. What does that say about how fit Jessie is to be a mother? I mean what kind of mother allows her son/daughter to grow up in a world where criminals are protected? And then there's the reaction to the article. Opinions seem pretty evenly split. But even those who's opinions supported Allison (aka Foxy), I would think, wouldn't want an operation like the Top Hat Club to flourish in the city they lived. It would all be a matter of how the prosecution presented their case in court and to the public.

Of course, I may have seen way too many episodes of Law & Order

[Mad Monk]

Apart from Fel's legal points, what do you think will happen if the pregnant wife of a journalist is locked up to try to force him to reveal his sources? Sources linked to a human interest story, which is being reprinted nationally? Especially in an election year?

Unless things operate substantially differently in Texas than in England, the Commissioner of Police would soon be looking for a new job, and I would not be surprised if Jessie could be entitled to substantial compensation.

I don't know, they could easily play it as a soon-to-be mother protecting a dangerous criminal enterprise. What does that say about how fit Jessie is to be a mother? I mean what kind of mother allows her son/daughter to grow up in a world where criminals are protected? And then there's the reaction to the article. Opinions seem pretty evenly split. But even those who's opinions supported Allison (aka Foxy), I would think, wouldn't want an operation like the Top Hat Club to flourish in the city they lived. It would all be a matter of how the prosecution presented their case in court and to the public.

Of course, I may have seen way too many episodes of Law & Order

I doubt if a club like the "Top Hat" could operate without the police knowing about it. I would not be too suprised if it turned out that the commissioner of police was one of the furs who had raped Allison in the past or had some other connection to the club. It could also be that by putting police pressure on Kit and Jessie, the club's owners were trying to force Allison back into working for them.

Have you ever seen the film Personal Services?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093727/

[Fel]

Correct about some in the police knowing about the Top Hat.

There are some in the police and the District Attorney's office that know about the Top Hat, and they're paid to keep the club from being hassled.

A few are even members.

Remember, the Top Hat is not your average illegal whorehouse. It's an elite sex club for the rich, and they have influence.

The DA of Travis County does not know about the club, he's a moral crusader, and it's from him that the push is coming from. But, the ones to which he passes down the orders ARE doing their part to make sure nothing happens. That's why Kit got that "milk toast" visit first, all but warning him of what was coming, which gave him time to prepare. Had there not been that kind of influence, odds were the first Kit heard about their interest would have been when they served him with a search warrant.

As to the club trying to force Allison to come back...think about it. It makes a ton of money, and all their strippers and workers are well paid and very willing to work there. Why would they risk all that to force just ONE of their strippers to come back? Allison was their highest priced girl, true, but she can also be replaced with much less hassle than it would be to force her to return to work, where she would be very, very UNwilling to work...and that would both cost them business and maybe jeopardize their truce with the cops about them looking the other way. That's just too much to risk. It's better business sense to just let her go and find another girl.

[dellstart]

Correct about some in the police knowing about the Top Hat.

There are some in the police and the District Attorney's office that know about the Top Hat, and they're paid to keep the club from being hassled.

A few are even members.

Remember, the Top Hat is not your average illegal whorehouse. It's an elite sex club for the rich, and they have influence.

The DA of Travis County does not know about the club, he's a moral crusader, and it's from him that the push is coming from. But, the ones to which he passes down the orders ARE doing their part to make sure nothing happens. That's why Kit got that "milk toast" visit first, all but warning him of what was coming, which gave him time to prepare. Had there not been that kind of influence, odds were the first Kit heard about their interest would have been when they served him with a search warrant.

As to the club trying to force Allison to come back...think about it. It makes a ton of money, and all their strippers and workers are well paid and very willing to work there. Why would they risk all that to force just ONE of their strippers to come back? Allison was their highest priced girl, true, but she can also be replaced with much less hassle than it would be to force her to return to work, where she would be very, very UNwilling to work...and that would both cost them business and maybe jeopardize their truce with the cops about them looking the other way. That's just too much to risk. It's better business sense to just let her go and find another girl.

We had a similar situation in Sydney.There was this guy known as Mr Sin, who took over the red light district in Sydney in the 50"s through all types of intimidation or murder.He established a "gentleman club which had amongst it members , many many high ranking members of Parliament and the police force. For many years he used these contacts to further his various nefarious schemes .In the end he was caught on tax fraud , but that was only in the late eighties or early nineties.Some say he was the The Don of the underworld at the time.

[DigitalMaestro]

I imagine that any real police harassment of Kit would be stepped on quite vehemently by Vil, if not by the entire Vulpan family, as they are trying to get on Kit's good side and are sometime patrons of the Top Hat.

--DigitalMaestro

[Mad Monk]

As to the club trying to force Allison to come back...think about it. It makes a ton of money, and all their strippers and workers are well paid and very willing to work there. Why would they risk all that to force just ONE of their strippers to come back? Allison was their highest priced girl, true, but she can also be replaced with much less hassle than it would be to force her to return to work, where she would be very, very UNwilling to work...and that would both cost them business and maybe jeopardize their truce with the cops about them looking the other way. That's just too much to risk. It's better business sense to just let her go and find another girl.

That would be the logical approach - I was thinking in terms of the ultra-rich who patronise the club and feel that rules do not apply to them and refuse to accept a "No."

The window you've shown on the Vulpans has made me expect the worst. (Which is a comlpiment to your storytelling abilities.)