MEDIA Taricani case grows more murky in court BY IAN DONNIS

For a long time, WJAR-TV (Channel 10) reporter Jim Taricani’s refusal to identify the source of a videotape depicting corruption at Providence City Hall represented a clash of big ideals — free press versus fair trial. But by the end of a remarkable hearing in US District Court on Thursday, December 9, the picture that emerged more closely resembled that of two men — Taricani and his source, lawyer Joseph A. Bevilacqua Jr. — trying to escape from what had become an increasingly sticky situation.

During a daylong drama reminiscent of the Plunder Dome trial of former Providence Mayor Vincent A. "Buddy" Cianci Jr., familiar faces returned to the hulking federal courthouse, ranging from some of the defense lawyers in the case to inveterate court-watcher Mary Tassone. Appropriately enough, the contested videotape showed former Cianci aide Frank Corrente taking a bribe from a government informant.

Under questioning by special prosecutor by Marc DeSisto, Taricani acknowledged offering "clues" that might offer a path to his confidential source a few months before Bevilacqua was identified in November. Taricani testified that he did this after a viewer called him, telling him that Bevilacqua had revealed himself at a summer dinner party as the embattled reporter’s secret source. Taricani, who had maintained a public stance at the time of zealously guarding his source’s identity, acknowledged providing the clues to federal investigators without confirming the validity of the viewer’s tip. The reporter added that the prospect of Bevilacqua disclosing his own identity upset him, and that he made the clues available since he thought it was a matter for DeSisto to investigate.

Bevilacqua, meanwhile, said he provided the tape because of his regard for Taricani, but did so with the understanding that it would not be broadcast until after it was played in court. Seemingly unconcerned and bemused at times during his testimony, Bevilacqua repeatedly attributed his provision of the tape to bad judgment. Acknowledging having committed perjury by previously denying under oath that he was Taricani’s source, Bevilacqua faces a federal investigation for his role in the case.

As it turned out, Taricani was the one who ultimately made it possible for Bevilacqua to be identified as his source — unintentionally, he says — during his "chance encounter" with FBI agent Dennis Aiken, a longtime source, at an Au Bon Pain near the courthouse on the morning of Taricani’s November 18 trial for criminal contempt. Although the reporter’s disclosure of what he most wanted not to reveal (see "The trials of Jim Taricani," News, December 10) constituted a rich irony, the copious local and national press coverage of the case has generally overlooked this.

For his part, Taricani remained unbowed in court, and in a statement issued after US District Court chief judge Ernest C. Torres sentenced him to six months of home confinement, NBC-owned-and-operated WJAR thoroughly backed its longtime investigative reporter.

The judge, in uncharacteristically lengthy comments after the sentence, sought to debunk five "myths" that he said the media has developed around the case. Referring to the court order that Bevilacqua violated in 2000 by giving the videotape to Taricani, Torres noted how reporters can not ethically gain information, for example, by breaking into a home. Furthermore, he said, the First Amendment protects the press from censorship, not from hiding a source that illegally provides information.

Set, however, against the national backdrop of a secretive White House and heightened governmental efforts to extract information from reporters, Taricani’s prosecution remains for quite a few in the media an instance in which a judge unnecessarily criminalized journalism.