From: Eric Cordian <emc@wire.insync.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 00:53:43 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: 1st Ammendment Tossed in Paladin Case
Message-ID: <199711111642.KAA20562@wire.insync.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



RICHMOND, Va. (AP) -- Ruling that the right to a free press doesn't
cover a how-to-kill book, a federal appeals panel said the families
of a hired killer's victims may sue the publisher of a book that he
consulted.
 
A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied
First Amendment protection to ``Hit Man: A Technical Manual for
Independent Contractors,'' saying publisher Paladin Press knew it
would be used by murderers.
 
``The Supreme Court has never protected as abstract advocacy speech so
explicit in its palpable entreaties to violent crime,'' the panel
said in its ruling Monday.
 
The book was sold to James Edward Perry, who was convicted of killing
Mildred Horn; her disabled 8-year-old son, Trevor; and the son's
nurse, Janice Saunders, in Silver Spring, Md., in 1993. The women were
shot between the eyes and the boy's respirator was unplugged.
 
Perry is on death row for the murders, and Lawrence T. Horn, Mrs.
Horn's former husband, was sentenced to life in prison for hiring
Perry. Horn's motive was to collect $1.7 million from a malpractice
settlement that his son Trevor won from a hospital after the accident
that left him a quadriplegic.
 
Paladin has never challenged Perry's claim that he followed some of
the 130-page paperback's advice.
 
``This decision says that if you're in the business of helping
instruct murderers on how to slaughter innocent women and children,
you aren't going to find any shelter in the First Amendment,'' said
Howard Siegel, an attorney for the families.
 
Paladin Press, based in Boulder, Colo., plans to ask the full 4th
Circuit to review the panel's decision and will seek a Supreme Court
review if necessary, said Lee Levine, the publisher's attorney.
 
The appeals court ''did not sufficiently take into account the First
Amendment implications of holding the publisher of a book legally
responsible for actions of someone reading the book,'' Levine said.
 
The lawsuit was supported by victim rights groups, while The
Washington Post Co., The New York Times Co. and other media
organizations filed briefs supporting Paladin's position.
 
In 1996, U.S. District Judge Alexander Williams ruled that the
victims' families could not hold Paladin liable because of the First
Amendment's guarantee of free speech.
 
The appeals panel sent the case back to Williams for trial.

--
Eric Michael Cordian 0+
O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"