Wen Ho Lee, the former nuclear weapons scientist once
suspected of being a spy, settled his privacy lawsuit Friday and will receive
$1.6 million from the government and five news organizations in a case that
turned into a fight over reporters' confidential sources.
Wen Ho Lee, (C), walks
out a free man from the Federal Courthouse in Albuquerque, New Mexico,
September, 13, 2000. Lee, a former nuclear scientist once suspected of
spying, will get $1,645,000 in a settlement reached on Friday of his
lawsuit accusing U.S. government officials of disclosing personal
information about him and the probe.
[Reuters] |
Lee will receive $895,000 from the government for legal
fees and associated taxes in the 6 1/2-year-old lawsuit in which he accused the
Energy and Justice departments of violating his privacy rights by leaking
information that he was under investigation as a spy for China.
The Associated Press and four other news organizations have agreed to pay Lee
$750,000 as part of the settlement, which ends contempt of court proceedings
against five reporters who refused to disclose the sources of their stories
about the espionage investigation.
Lee said of the settlement: "We are hopeful that the agreements reached today
will send the strong message that government officials and journalists must and
should act responsibly in discharging their duties and be sensitive to the
privacy interests afforded to every citizen of this country."
The payment by AP, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, The Washington
Post and ABC is the only one of its kind in recent memory, and perhaps ever,
legal and media experts said.
The companies said they agreed to the sum to forestall jail sentences for
their reporters, even larger payments in the form of fines and the prospect of
revealing confidential sources. The companies and their reporters were not
defendants in the privacy lawsuit.
"We were reluctant to contribute anything to this settlement, but we sought
relief in the courts and found none," the companies said. "Given the rulings of
the federal courts in Washington and the absence of a federal shield law, we
decided this was the best course to protect our sources and to protect our
journalists."
The statement noted that the accuracy of the reporting itself was not
challenged.
The government agencies did not admit that they had violated Lee's privacy
rights.
Betsy Miller, one of Lee's lawyers, said the payments
show "that both the government and the journalists knew that they had
significant exposure had this case gone to trial."
