Massachusetts Superior Court Judge Ernest B. Murphy, having won a libel judgment of more than $2 million against the Boston Herald, smaller of the city’s two big newspapers, is now demanding that a court order the paper’s assets frozen to guarantee payment of the judgment. (Jonathan Saltzman, “Court is asked to freeze Herald’s assets”, Boston Globe, Nov. 29). Dan Kennedy at Media Nation (Nov. 29) says that the Herald’s original article criticizing Murphy was anything but a model of good journalism.
But free-press advocates ought to be concerned that a sitting judge can have some influence over the Herald’s future — and possibly its very survival — because of reporting that amounted to criticism of how he performed his public duties. That, more than anything, is what the First Amendment was designed to protect.
(via Romenesko). For the chilling effects of libel awards won by judges in Pennsylvania, see Mar. 16, 2004, etc.
2 Comments
“concerned that a sitting judge can have some influence over the Herald’s future”
If he had another job would they be so worried? He openly won the case in a court and as long as it was an above the board win, then he should be treated like anyone else….
Judge Murphy’s “fascinatingly repellent” letters
That’s what media critic Dan Kennedy (Dec. 21) calls an excerpt from one of the handwritten letters that Boston judge Ernest Murphy sent to Boston Herald publisher Pat Purcell following Murphy’s securing of a libel…