So what are they admitting?

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Tue Dec 03, 2002 6:50 pm

The $1.65 million fines will be paid by Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Morgan Stanley & Co., Goldman Sachs & Co., the Salomon Smith Barney unit of Citigroup Inc. and U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray Inc. The firms, which did not admit wrongdoing ....***"Which did not admit wrongdoing." What a crock. In civil cases, the accused parties almost always insist that wording to that effect be included in the settlement. But there's nothing in the First Amendment that says we have to print such nonsense.***

Rio · **Posted:** Wed Dec 04, 2002 2:22 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
***"Which did not admit wrongdoing." What a crock. In civil cases, the accused parties almost always insist that wording to that effect be included in the settlement. But there's nothing in the First Amendment that says we have to print such nonsense.***<hr></blockquote>I agree, it's a crock. I disagree that we can simply not print it. It's as much a part of the settlement as the fine. The companies are saying, "OK, we want to put this nastiness behind us so we'll pay the fine. But we didn't do it!" If the companies did have to admit guilt, they wouldn't have agreed to the settlement at all, which is no small point.Print the "We didn't do it" crapola, and let the readers make up their own minds.

Guest · **Posted:** Wed Dec 04, 2002 3:40 pm

The payout IS the admission of wrongdoing. You don't get the choice of an Alford plea in a situation like this.

ADKbrown · **Posted:** Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:51 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Jim Thomsen:
The payout IS the admission of wrongdoing. You don't get the choice of an Alford plea in a situation like this.<hr></blockquote>You can't assume that. Defendants do sometimes settle to avoid the hassle and expense of protratcted litigation and trial.

Bolder1 · **Posted:** Thu Dec 05, 2002 12:31 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by ADKbrown:
You can't assume that. Defendants do sometimes settle to avoid the hassle and expense of protratcted litigation and trial.<hr></blockquote>Including newspapers accused of libel...I'd agree that the payout appears to be an admission of something, but you need to be scrupulously fair when covering settlements, even if it stinks to high heaven. Just because there's a lot of money involved doesn't mean we should pile on the defendants. A settlement is not the same as a verdict. And who knows what amout was sought in the suit?But having said that, I think most readers equate big payouts with guilt.

dimn · **Posted:** Fri Dec 13, 2002 5:40 pm

still, doesn't mean it needs to be in the lede.

Rio · **Posted:** Sat Dec 14, 2002 3:43 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Temple Stark:
still, doesn't mean it needs to be in the lede.<hr></blockquote>Ah, but it doesn't look like it was.

Testy Copy Editors

So what are they admitting?

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links