MorallyRight1 wrote on Apr 17, 2007 11:52 PM:What? Yesterday you didn't even have a reporter taking credit for the very brief article, yet today you are having your attorneys (more thna one?) object to the fact that there is a request on the table to keep media out of only certain proceedings. Haven't you ever heard of 'Closed Door Hearings?' Schools do it, Congress does it. Every level of government, from the very casual to the most stringent (including the Marine Corps)does just that on a daily basis. Yet, now with these three remaining accused, wherein yesterday there wasn't even a reporter interested, you want to close in for the kill? If I am not mistaken, the media has been held responsible for the judging, jury and sentencing in these very proceedings, even before the proceedings actually even began. And, the liklihood of ever getting an unbiased judge (the duplication in these very proceedings is almost unbelievable), much less an untainted (or unbiased, for that matter) military jury is all but gone. Yes, the public needs your newspaper and that of others, and the news contained therein. Yes, you have every constitutional right to print whatever you want. As do these men have the right to a fair and impartial trial. But, I am quite certain there are many, many facts, issues and events that go on every day, that are just as important, just a newsworthy, that you never even know about. But do those matter to you? Will you loose that many sales by maybe waiting until the proceedings in question have been completed, to report that part? For goodness sake, there are very few reporters even bothering to cover the war these days, up close and personal, because it is 'old news'? Or, maybe ,just possibly, there are some events/issues that justice might be better served if not accompanied with the morning paper. This newspaper has not given even a portion of the attention to the Haditha case as it has Hamdania. Why is that? Yet your editors are complaining? Such a shame once again.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Apr 18, 2007 2:08 PM:I 've been trying to understand the press in this country. I've come to the conclusion, after having read all of the NCTimes articles and having researched many other Mainstream media reports, that regardless of the bias of Mainstream media or reporting by NCTimes (for which I'm grateful), the thing that bothers me runs neck and neck with MorallyRight1's view that there are some things that need be left alone to protect the accused's chance for a fair trial. Yet this whole thing has not been "fair" from Iraq to the U.S. If the press is going to be allowed to report everything from the viewpoint of the prosecution, then I feel the press is obligated to follow up on all of the negative aspects brought out by the defense concerning NCIS, Unauthorized leaks by military officials and politicians, and the Marine Corps' failure to provide a "fair and impartial" process for the accused. If the prosecution is allowed to have "its" version and all of its accusations out there, then the defense should be allowed the same. If the Prosecution is allowed weeks in Iraq, then the Defense should be allowed the same. Thus far, it has been a one-sided Persecution and nothing more. Americans have the right to know all of the facts. The prosecution doesn't own the courtroom, or does it? What the hell is the defense there for if they aren't allowed to DEFEND???

Justice wrote on Apr 19, 2007 10:17 AM:Dispite all the background noise to the contrary, let the prosecution and defense continue in open court.

Billy wrote on Apr 20, 2007 4:09 AM:One of the reasons that we in this nation have a right to an "open" hearing and trial is precisely because the news media (and other concerned citizens) needs to attend so that no one is railroaded or framed. Kind of unusual that the defence attorney doesn't want the public to know whats going on. Tough! Its our right to know.