Late Monday, Michael Patrick Leahy, the editor-in chief of The Tennessee Star, was ordered to appear at a show cause hearing before Tennessee Chancery Court Judge L’Ashea Myles on June 17 over his publication’s reporting about the writings left by Covenant School killer Audrey Hale after her devastating attack on the Covenant School on March 27, 2023 that claimed the lives of three 9-year-old children and three adults.
The purpose of the show cause hearing will be “to determine why the alleged publication of certain purported documents by Petitioners Star Digital Media [sic] and Michael Leahy, as the Editor-in-Chief, does not violate the Orders of this Court subjecting them to contempt proceedings and sanctions.”
The Star reported last Wednesday it has obtained 80 pages of Hale’s writings from a journal left in her vehicle and discovered by the Metro Nashville Police Department (MNPD) on March 27, 2023. Those pages are found on 40 photographic images, or documents, each of which contains two pages of Hale’s journal. The Star has subsequently published numerous articles based in part on some of the information found in those 40 photographic images of 80 pages, but it has not published a single one of those photographic images, or documents.
Leahy (pictured here) and Star News Digital Media, Inc., which owns and operates The Star, are both plaintiffs in the ongoing Tennessee lawsuit to compel the MNPD to release Hale’s writings. Leahy and Star News are also plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit which seeks to compel the FBI to release Hale’s writings.
Judge Myles explained in her Monday order that the Court “received a media call requesting a comment or statement.”
According to Myles’ order, the comment request involved the “alleged publication of certain purported documents and information that this Court has in its possession for in camera review in this matter.” (emphasis added)
WSMV reporter Stacey Cameron (pictured above) acknowledged that he placed the “media call requesting comment” in an article he authored that was published by WSMV on Monday, and was responsible for making the unsubstantiated allegation to the judge that apparently included the inaccurate claim that The Star had allegedly published “[leaked] documents in violation of her order.”:
However, Judge Myles was unaware of the supposed leak, until WSMV4 Investigates’ Stacey Cameron called the court asking for a reaction to the leak, wanting to know if she was considering holding the Star or anyone else in contempt.
On Monday night, Judge Myles set a court hearing for next Monday morning, ordering the Star and Michael Leahy, to appear before the judge and show cause why she should not hold them in contempt for their alleged publication of the documents in violation of her order.
According to Cameron, he specifically called the court to ask if Myles “was considering holding” The Star “or anyone else in contempt.”
In a post Cameron made on the social media platform X, he additionally claimed, “My phone call to the court prompts contempt hearing in Covenant writings case following new round of leaks.”
On Monday Leahy will be asked to explain in court “why the alleged publication of certain documents” (emphasis added) by The Star does not violate previous orders set by the court. On February 13, the court released an order that stated:
Any supplemental filings, declarations, and/or affidavits filed by the Parties and/or Amici or sought to be filed by the Parties and/or Amici containing any direct information, no matter how obtained, which is the subject matter of this case SHALL NOT be filed with the Court but SHALL BE submitted for in camera review following the procedures delineated in this case. Any supplemental filings, declarations, and/or affidavits filed with the Clerk & Master on Tuesday, February 12, 2024, containing information, no matter how obtained, which is the subject matter of this case, shall not be made part of the record and shall be submitted to this Court for in camera review. Any efforts to usurp the Orders of this Court by any Party, Counsel and/or Amici regarding the matters currently under in camera review shall be sanctioned to the fullest extent of the law, including contempt of Court.”
On February 25, Judge Myles issued this “Order Clarifying the Order of February 13, 2024.”
Myles’ Monday order specifies that Leahy will be required to appear in person at the hearing, which is set for 11 a.m., the normal start time of The Michael Patrick Leahy Show on News Talk AM 760 in Nashville. Aaron Gulbransen, a former reporter for The Star, is expected cover the Covenant matter on June 17 as a guest host.
Leahy sent a comment request to Cameron subsequent to the publication of his unsubstantiated claims to Judge Myles in the WSMV 4 article.
Leahy asked Cameron:
1. Did you place a media call to the office of Chancery Court Judge L’Ashea Myles on Monday June 10 alleging The Tennessee Star “[published] certain purported documents and information that this Court has in its possession for in camera review in this matter.”?
2. Which specific articles published by The Tennessee Star did you cite to the Court that you claim include “certain purported documents … that this Court has in its possession for in camera review in this matter.”?
3. Before you made the allegation to the Court that The Tennessee Star published “certain purported documents … that this Court has in its possession,” did you attempt to contact The Tennessee Star or me to confirm the veracity of your allegation? We have no record that you made such an effort.
4. Which specific articles published by The Tennessee Star did you cite to the Court that you claim include “information that this Court has in its possession for in camera review in this matter.” ?
5. Before you made the allegation to the Court that The Tennessee Star published “information that this Court has in its possession” did you attempt to contact The Tennessee Star or me to confirm the veracity of your allegation? We have no record that you made such an effort.
6. Which specific Orders of the Court prohibit “the publication of certain purported documents by Petitioners Star Digital Media and Michael Leahy, as the Editor-in-Chief” thereby allegedly constituting a violation of the Orders of the Court?”
Cameron did not reply to Leahy’s comment request prior to press time.
Prior to working as a journalist, a WSMV 4 biography explains Cameron was professionally trained as a lawyer and obtained his juris doctor from Syracuse University before practicing “law in Cincinnati, St. Louis, and New York City.”
Cameron does not appear to practice law in Tennessee, but a Facebook profile for Cameron claims he formerly served as a “Investigative Reporter [and] Legal Analyst at KCTV 5 News Kansas City.”
WSMV 4 is owned by Gray Television, a publicly traded broadcasting company based in Atlanta, Georgia which reportedly owns nearly 200 television stations across 114 markets throughout the United States.
Gray Television in 2022 released its first Environment, Social, and Governance (ESG) Report, referring to the controversial ESG scoring which rates companies for their commitment a number of practices including sustainable environmental practices, fair compensation plans for workers, and referring to employees by their preferred genders.
In the report, Gray Television revealed two journalists working for the publicly traded broadcaster won “two awards for Excellence in Diversity, Equity and Inclusion.”
– – –
Tom Pappert is the lead reporter for The Tennessee Star, and also reports for The Pennsylvania Daily Star and The Arizona Sun Times. Follow Tom on X/Twitter. Email tips to [email protected].
Photo “WSMV Reporter Stacey Cameron” by WSMV.
NOT SURPRISED THAT ITS WSMV owned by Gray TV in Atlanta. Their ESG compliance explains their employment of Cameron. Why did he leave the attorney business? More investigation needed there. Even if he were disbarred for one reason or another, he would, or should know that none of Tennessee Stars articles included any publication of “documents”. The unsigned FBI memo regarding ” LEGACY Tokens” stated EVIDENCE should be destroyed never to see the light of day, is absurd. What is the history on this so-called FBI POLICY?
SO STRANGE HOW THE FBI IS SO INVOLVED IN LOCAL CRIMES without request of the local LEA.
Now we know, thanks to a good person who apparently saw the COVER UP, that the shooter was under Psychiatric Care by VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER for many years. That means Ms Hale’s psychiatric treatment started when she was six years old.
It’s very much in the publics interest to see why a medical facility would not report a person with violent ideations to the proper authorities. Had VUMC created a monster like a Joseph Mengele in Germany? Thank goodness Ms Hale kept her diaries or the truth would have been buried along with her & 6 innocent people. Looks like that was the plan.
Many questions come to mind 1) Diagnoses ;
2) medications 3) cost of treatments 4) any surgeries)
Did insurance cover 20 plus years of treatments & meds, or was she (Ms Hale) an experiment? Did VUMC receive any grants or other funding to conduct their experimental treatments? Perhaps the NIH?
After all VUMC is a “RESEARCH” FACILITY. I think all their funding should be audited. A lot of sleeze could be revealed. Especially, as it relates to minor children.
THEY FUND A LOT OF SLEEZY THINGS, AS WE NOW KNOW .
Could VUMC still be performing Mutilation Surgeries on minors who are sexually “confused”?
Maybe in another State even?
A hospital in TX was recently discovered continuing the abusive surgeries on minors, even though the State had outlawed it.
Now I not only don’t trust Public Health Institutions, I cannot trust hospitals. OR JUDGES.
I can only assume that Leahy conferred with an actual practicing attorney in Tennessee before posting the content. This a opposed to Sexton, who is not a practicing attorney in the state of Tennessee. Sounds to me that Sexton is either jealous that Leahy got the scoop or they are doing the bidding of dem overlords and engaging in lawfare as they are want to do.
What a snitch!
So now the media is willing to attack its own long respected principle of the media protecting sources.
Question for WSMV: What other American traditions of free speech and free press are they willing to assault in order to protect their editorial positions?