Criticism over Lipsey coverage unwarranted |

Criticism over Lipsey coverage unwarranted

Criticisms of the reporting on the Joseph and Shira Lipsey criminal case by both the judge and the defense attorney are unwarranted and unsupported.

Both Judge Chris Seldin and Yale Galanter, Joseph Lipsey’s lawyer, were reported to have decried the media attention and community scorn that the initial reporting was said to have created.

Seldin reportedly said that the attention and media-generated opprobrium, including misreporting of facts, can exceed the punitive effect of a court sentence.

However, they failed to provide evidence that the reporting was inaccurate, or untrue.

According to The Aspen Times, which carried the reporting, it was based on information contained in an arrest warrant for the Lipseys, filed by local police agencies.

In our society, with its constitutionally mandated open courts and press freedoms, the press filled its proper role of disseminating factual information of significant impact.

Seldin is correct when he noted that the punitive impact on the guilty parties can be greater than a court sentence.

That is how our open society operates. It provides an additional deterrent for those who would contemplate illegal behavior. The public opprobrium by an informed society contributes to, and sometimes exceeds, the actual punishment of the court.

Bernie Grauer


Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

Readers around Aspen and Snowmass Village make the Aspen Times’ work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.