The Herald Responds

Published Dec 23 2005, 02:59 PM by webteam

Here, embedded in today's very fair and professional story
by the Herald's Maggie Mulvihill, is the Herald's reaction to Judge Murphy's lawyers allegations that the paper is engaged in a publicity stunt.

The Herald, in a statement released last night, said, "Judge Murphy realizes now that he has made a series of mistakes. But the judge's letters to the Herald speak loudly and clearly for themselves. His actual letters must be read. They demand $1 million more than he was awarded at trial. No attempt to explain them away will wash. Nothing in Judge Murphy's letters sounds, looks or remotely resembles settlement discussions."

The Herald statement also pointed out that more than 70 percent of public officials who win jury verdicts in libel cases are reversed on appeal.

"The Herald does not blame Judge Murphy for trying to dig himself out of this mess, but it strongly believes the judge should be held to account for attempting to intimidate people into giving up constitutionally protected rights of appeal."

After this salvo of charges and countercharges, two issues still stick in the craw.
1) Why did Judge Murphy ask for considerably more money than he was owed at the time?
2) Why did the Herald wait the better part of a year to reveal Murphy's letters and cry foul?