I will be filming the court hearing Tuesday, May 15th at 2 pm at the AZ Court of Appeals. Video will be available that evening at:http://www.youtube.com/user/AUDITAZ
Links to Briefs filed for case tomorrow by all parties in case.
1. Appellant Brief To AZ Court Of Appeals By Bill Risner .pdf: http://tinyurl.com/7b2hbkz
2 Brief of Defendant – Appellee by the Office of the City of Tucson City Attorney May 11, 2012 pdf: http://tinyurl.com/6pby78s
3A Brief By Attorneys For Intervenors-Appellees Campus Acquisitions, By LEWIS AND ROCA May 11, 2012 pdf: http://tinyurl.com/6pqo4cl
3B Appendix To Brief Of Intervenors-Appellees by Lewis And Roca May 11, 1012 pdf: http://tinyurl.com/6rwxkzf
3C Final Appendix To Brief Of Intervenors-Appellees By Lewis And Roca Part 3: http://tinyurl.com/78zozxb
Below is what I filed to get permission.
Request To The Arizona Court of Appeals Under AZ Supreme Court Rule 122(f): Media Access For Audio And Video Recording Attention Jeffrey Handler Case NO. Dave Devine and David Boston v. Roger Randolph,
No. 2CA-CV 2012-0069.
Date and time of hearing: May 15, 2012 at 2:00 PM
Contacts:
John R. Brakey 520 339 2696 - AUDITAZ@cox.net Z5947 S. Placita Picacho El Diablo, Tucson AZ 85706
This request asks the court for camera access in the Dave Devine
and David Boston v. Roger Randolph, No. 2CA-CV 2012-0069
This request is being made, not by a traditional media outlet, but by
an activist organization made up of Libertarians, Democrats and
Republicans who are concerned about the conduct of elections and who
have a history of documenting election processes, reform efforts and
in some cases abuses of election handling at the local, state and
national level.
AUDIT-AZ is capable of providing modern, quiet recording gear
compliant with the AZ Supreme Court's rules at 122 generallyand in
subsections (r) and (s) in particular.
Like many other local courts, this court will have to grapple with the
question of “who exactly are the media”, or to put it in a more
constitutional context, “does freedom of the press refer to an
industry, or a technology?”. Local courts have been split on this
issue but the US Supreme Court has been remarkably consistent, coming
down firmly that “freedom of the press” refers to thecivil rights of
anybody who owns a printing press or the modern equivalent of same
such as a video camera.
We would refer the court to a recent paper by UCLA School of Law
professor Eugene Volokh titled “FREEDOM FOR THE PRESS AS AN INDUSTRY,
OR FOR THE PRESS AS A TECHNOLOGY? FROM THE FRAMING TO TODAY”,
available at: http://www.pennumbra.com/issues/pdfs/160-2/Volokh.pdf
The one fairly recent piece of Supreme Court doctrine being taken
seriously against the “press as a technology” view still provides
little or no backing for discriminating against a citizen-based
activist group over “traditional news outlets”. To cite Professor
Volokh's paper at page 508:
Justice Powell’s three-paragraph concurrence in Branzburg, which was open to a relatively weak newsgatherer’ s privilege, did implicitly reject the all-speakers-equal approach. Under Justice Powell’s approach, a person who gathers information for future mass communication would get a privilege of some unspecified force. But a person who gathers information just to convey it to business partners or friends would presumably not be entitled to a privilege, since allowing the privilege to apply so broadly would eviscerate the general duty to testify.
In the matter at hand, the first amendment rights being applied for
are not connected to a “business partner or friend” relationship but
are instead connected to core political and egal concerns of the
highest possible priority in a First Amendment-based analysis.
For the foregoing reasons, AUDIT-AZ requests the ability to record
the proceedings in this case in the most non-intrusive fashion
possible. We also agree to rapidly provide video to other interested
parties in the traditional media or additional activist groups to
avoid the “sea of cameras” problem limited in Rule 122(n).
We thank the court for your consideration of this matter,
John Brakey
Co-Founder, AUDIT-AZ
520 578 5678 Cell 339 2696
