How has the players’ union not hired a lawyer to answer this question? 

I have taken four ethics classes in my educational life, one for “mass media” and three for “psychotherapy.”  The one for mass media was first and I really wonder exactly how far down one has to bury that information to run with these “leaks” and sleep well at night and get up tomorrow and not pursue any other part of it.

Could the fans hire ShysterLawyer to sue on behalf of steroid overkill and lack of interest?

Right on, Craig, though like Dan, I’m short on ideas of figuring it out.  Gotta think about it some more.

I not only want to know who leaked, I want to see them marched out in handcuffs.

As I’ve said before, the pattern of leaks implies malice - and not just towards the players, but to MLB, apparently for not going as far as the leaker would like.

Maybe it’s schadenfreude and the leaker represents the “off with their heads” school of sports-talk radio host, but hey, it’s a federal crime he’s committing and I think he should suffer the appropriate punishment.

And I realize 1. was not a question. I mis-wrote.

Hell yeah Craig. At this point I’m pretty sure we lawerly types are supposed to start throwing our panties on stage.

Craig:

http://trueslant.com/jonpessah/2009/07/30/the-real-questions-about-steroids/

3. Are reporters actively soliciting sources for the test results?

It makes a difference. If a source gives the media documents under seal, the reporter is on safe ground. If the reporters are pushing sources to break the law, they are complicit.

—

Can a citizen-journalist pose this question to Selena Roberts and Michael Schmidt?

Chip: different deal with BALCO. Leaking grand jury testimony is independently illegal and subject to its own sanction.  This is not that. This is violation of a court order that can lead to criminal contempt charges (i.e. lower jail time if any) but, more significantly for the lawyer involved, could mean disbarment or suspension.

Craig, you could not be more right. The lawyers who did this need to be tracked down, and kicked out. Me, I object to shield laws, which allow the media to act as information launderers—-as far as I’m concerned, the reporter who publishes illegally leaked material is aiding and abetting, not to mention encouraging. I’d love to force the reporters to reveal the source. But journalists have somehow sold the myth that “the public has a right to know” stuff that the law and court rules say it DOESN’T have a right to know, and as long as that’s the case, the chances of catching the leaking scum are slim at best.

All of these leaks seem to be getting broken in the New York Times, correct?  You say that somebody’s getting paid for this, Craig… if the New York Times turned out to be involved, would they (or their reporter) be committing a crime?  Particularly if they are directly paying for the leak, obviously, but I doubt that’s the case.

I guess the next question is, who’s paying for the names, which leads to the question of who benefits?  The media benefits, but as I just said, I really can’t imagine the New York Times paying directly for leaked material.  Maybe it’s a conspiracy of officials from other sports trying to take down the great name of baseball?  Yes, that must be it.

I didn’t say someone was getting paid in this instance. I said that money is one of the kinds of things that motivates people to leak information or otherwise do criminal things.

I would suspect that the Times is NOT paying for it, because if that was ever found out they would be ruined as a paper. Major news outlets just don’t do this.  To be honest, I can’t see how money as a motive specifically fits in here.

As for the Times, I suspect that their reporters are simply workin’ it more, calling people connected to the case over and over again until they can find someone who says something.  Whether that is ethical is another question altogether.