As we noted tonight, the judge in the Jerry Sandusky child molestation trial ordered media outlets to wait until court was adjourned to transit the verdict.
According to Twitter buzz, local journos believe the New York Yimes ignored the rules.
Here was the NYTimes tweet announcing the verdict at 10:08pm Eastern:
NYT NEWS ALERT: Sandusky Is Found Guilty on 45 of 48 Counts in Child Sexual Abuse Case
— The New York Times (@nytimes) June 23, 2012
Will there be consequences?
@darrenrovell A contempt charge could be brought against the New York Times if they violated the judge's orders.
— Alicia Jessop (@RulingSports) June 23, 2012
Looks like a broken rule, but nonetheless. RT @nytimes: NEWS ALERT: Sandusky Is Found Guilty on 45 of 48 Counts in Child Sexual Abuse Case
— Dustin Hockensmith (@dhockensmith) June 23, 2012
Tweet penalty? RT @ProducerMatthew Local media in Pa reporting NYT broke rule not to report on counts before court was adjourned
— Darren Rovell (@darrenrovell) June 23, 2012
So much for that judge's order RT @elisewho: : RT @nytimes: NYT NEWS ALERT: Sandusky Is Found Guilty on 45 of 48 Counts
— Brad Willis (@BradWillis) June 23, 2012
https://twitter.com/schwincat05/status/216356665040191490
https://twitter.com/kevinmclark/status/216352564281737216
So how long before New York Times is held in contempt?
— Josh Campbell (@CampbellJD) June 23, 2012
Fishwrap of Record motto: Rules for thee, but not for NYT.
Some observers are cheering the Times:
Good on the Times, either way. Judge should know, you can't muzzle news in the 21st Century.
— Matthew Keys (@MatthewKeysLive) June 23, 2012
@ProducerMatthew I still find it ridiculous issuing the gag order. On high profile cases they should have court audio.
— Ryan Olsen (@rkolsen) June 23, 2012
FYI:
The @nytimes tweet breaking news of the verdict has already been retweeted over 7,000 times. (via @pbump)
— Michael Rusch (@weeddude) June 23, 2012