Since Wolf refused to give up the unedited portion of his videotape, he was served with a subpoena to force him to give up the tape by the District Attorney for the Ninth Circuit Court. He refused to comply with the subpoena, and was held in contempt of court. This process fits into the court structure in that a subpoena is used during the preliminary stages of a trial in order to allow both sides the capability to uncover all facts, allow all witnesses to be called, and to collect any other preliminary information needed before proceeding with the trial. "Contempt of Court" is a device used by the court system to attempt to coerce compliance with subpoena's issued under the law by means of fines or imprisonment. Wolf was imprisoned for being in contempt of court, and his lawyers argued in federal court to quash the subpoena, stating that Wolf is protected by California's shield law, which allows journalists to maintain confidential unpublished information obtained during newsgathering. Granting the government widespread power to request unused recordings, Wolf's layers argued, would turn journalists into an arm of the Justice Department, creating a chilling effect among citizens, thereby violating their First Amendment rights of free speech and assembly (Blitstein, 2006). Wolf's lawyers also contended that the subpoena was an unreasonable use of federal power to aid state and local investigations. The case surrounding Wolf's refusal to give up the videotape is a civil one, for it involves the First Amendment and freedom of speech. Currently, Wolf's appeal to overturn the contempt of court sentence was rejected, and he has stated in numerous interviews...

In civil court, there are two possible outcomes to Wolf's case: 1) If he refuses to turn over the tape, he could be served with an arrest warrant, and most likely be sentenced to jail times, or 2) He could wait until the government obtains a warrant to search his apartment, and then make it difficult for them to find the video. In the second civil court option, he may be able to cooperate by working out a deal with the federal government to show the officials only a portion of the unedited tape that they are interested in, not the entire unedited portion. If this case was brought in a criminal court, the outcome may be slightly different, because the charges would have to make Wolf's actions criminal. Possible charges could be acting as an accomplice, because he was aiding and protecting the suspect on the videotape. In this case, he would most likely be found guilty and sentenced to minimum prison time, depending on his criminal background.
Bibliography

Blitstein, R. (2006). Should Journalist Josh Wolf be Afraid? Retrieved September 13, 2006, from SF Weekly Website: www.sfweekly.com/Issues/2006-04-

19/news/news_print.html www.sfweekly.com/Issues/2006-04-

19/news/news_print.html.

McKinley, J. (2006). Court Denies Blogger's Appeal. Retrieved September 13, 2006, from The New York Times Website:

www.nytimes.com/2006/09/12/us/12video.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print.

Wolf, J. (2006). The Revolution will be Televised. Retrieved September 13, 2006, from Wordpress website: www.joshwolf.net/blog/?page_id=211.