guilty in a deal that ends a ill year legal battle. he s now back in australia. cheering and applause he was pursued by us prosecutors for leaking vast amounts of classified government and military documents, including those related to the afghanistan and iraq wars. in a press conference after his release, his lawyer called the prosecution the criminalisation of journalism . so, did he pioneer a new form ofjournalism by setting up wikileaks, and has his case, by pleading guilty, set a dangerous precedent for reporters? i started by talking to carrie decell, who is a senior staff attorney at the knight first amendment institute at columbia university. i think this plea deal is significant in two respects. i mean, in the first instance, it must be an enormous relief, of course, forjulian assange and his family and his supporters around the world, as well as for press freedom advocates here in the united states who have been quite concerned about a judicial ruling that would e
and his family and his supporters around the world, as well as for press freedom advocates here in the united states who have been quite concerned about a judicial ruling that would endorse the us government s interpretation of the espionage act and its consistency with the first amendment. first amendment being the right to free speech, just to remind everybody. yes, that s exactly right. freedom of speech, freedom of the press and a handful of other freedoms as well. but those are the ones at issue here. on the other hand, this plea deal really does cast a long shadow over press freedom in the united states. it s not a formal precedent in the sense that a judicial ruling would have been, but it does, i think, set a practical precedent for the possibility of future prosecutions ofjournalists who engage in very similar activities to the activities thatjulian assange has pleaded guilty to. and by that, i m referring to the solicitation of information from sources, the actual r
at the knight first amendment institute at columbia university. i think this plea deal is significant in two respects. i mean, in the first instance, it must be an enormous relief, of course, forjulian assange and his family and his supporters around the world, as well as for press freedom advocates here in the united states who have been quite concerned about a judicial ruling that would endorse the us government s interpretation of the espionage act and its consistency with the first amendment. first amendment being the right to free speech, just to remind everybody. yes, that s exactly right. freedom of speech, freedom of the press and a handful of other freedoms as well. but those are the ones at issue here. on the other hand, this plea deal really does cast a long shadow over press freedom in the united states. it s not a formal precedent in the sense that a judicial ruling would have been, but it does, i think, set a practical precedent for the possibility of future pro
A ruling in court today opens the door for dozens of new lawsuits against the former chairman of the state medical board according to attorneys for his former patients.
these two cases, both cases have been dismissed. the 2013 and 2014 cases, based on statute of limitation. and now, the new law that california allows individuals to have, that might have been borrowed by the statutes. that s a huge victory of this case. and the court of appeals saying the lower court got it wrong by determining that the operations did not owe a duty of care to the individuals. it s interesting to note, the appellate court says there s no case law to site. i think the decision whether the corporations are solely owned by michael jackson and the court, goes on to talk about how he could have restrained himself. he could have conducted himself in a different way, not to harm the boys at the time. i don t think this is a settled