Peister v. United States

How later courts describe this case

• permitting in camera review of statements of a government witness despite qualified journalistic privilege because of the unavailability from another source
• finding “no evidence that the prosecution acted in bad faith ... or overstepped the bounds of propriety and fairness” by making promise of informal immunity
• “[Jjournalists possess a qualified privilege not to divulge confidential sources and not to disclose unpublished information in their possession in criminal cases.”
• courts must balance defendant’s need for desired information against journalist’s interest in preventing production in a specific case
• journalists possess qualified privilege arising under federal common law to withhold unpublished information in criminal cases
• “Of course, the lack of a confidential source may be an important element in balancing the defendant’s need for the material sought against the interest of the journalist in preventing production in a particular case.”
• verbatim statements of witnesses contained in videotape "[b]y their very nature ... are not obtainable from any other source. They are unique bits of evidence that are frozen at a particular place and time.”
• considering subpoena for documentary materials