saying he was accused of leaking to , fired l.a. county superior court spokesman fires back - video presentation camera

By manufacturing-for-
Tabloid legal drama in Paris, Britney Spears, Rihanna and Lindsay, LA County High Court spokesman Alan palachini is a ubiquitous figure, as he explains the latest procedural twists and turns on the court steps, his white hair was mopped on the ocean of the lens.
But this week Parachini was fired because he said he leaked information to TMZ, the chief editor of the celebrity scandal, which is a false charge. com.
In his only public comment since he was granted administrative permission last month, parachini denied any inappropriate relationship with the gossip site, and said that the real reason for his dismissal was the conflict of access in the old media --
Especially newspaper reporters.
Bureaucratic data that makes most TMZ readers yawn.
Pallachini said that he has had numerous conflicts with court administrators in recent months who want to prevent or delay the release of employee salary information, judicial expenditure reports and what he considers to be public
"As an institution, the court does not consider itself obligated to become an open government agency related to financial and commercial operations," Parachini said . ".
Court officials including Executive Officer John.
Clark and Chief Justice Charles "Tim" McCoy declined to comment on his allegations.
A spokeswoman confirmed Parachini was no longer employed by the court but refused to respond to his allegations.
"I can't get in.
We do not comment on personnel issues, "said Mary Hearn, acting director of the press office of the court.
Former journalist Parachini worked for The Times and the American Civil Liberties Union and later served as a public figure in the court. He said he spoke loudly because the attempt to negotiate severance pay failed, and he felt widespread rumors in the media and local government circles about his bribery by TMZ
He voluntarily handed over the financial records to law enforcement and said they would prove that his only income was the $138,000 salary he received from the court.
TMZ became the main source of celebrity legal news during his tenure at palachini, but in 2008, when he hired former TMZ journalist Vania Stuelp as his deputy, about collusion
Earlier this year, Stupp lost court work in a round of budgets and returned to TMZ --Related Layoffs
"From the beginning, a lot of people in the media thought Vania was the TMZ factory," Parachini said . ".
A publicist at TMZ said neither Stuelp nor Harvey Levin, the site's founder, would comment.
Parachini said in an interview on October.
At 25 meetings, Clark told him that the executive lost confidence in him because he thought he was passing privileged material to TMZ.
He said he asked him when he was accused of leaking.
Clark did not disclose the details, but said that Parachini and Levin talked too often.
"I replied, 'Be charged with guilt.
I talked to a lot of reporters on the phone.
This is my job . "
He said he refused to sign a resignation at the meeting and hired a lawyer to start trying to reach a resignation agreement.
He said the court sent him a letter to terminate him on Monday.
Parachini described the TMZ allegations as an "excuse" to cover the increasingly contentious dispute between judges and court administrators, on the other hand, A series of information between the judge and the court executive on how to respond to the judge's submission, the Times and the reporter's Bay Area News Group for another newspaper.
He said that this fall, when the Times reporter asked for a copy of the Sheriff's Department contract with the court --
Parachini is obviously talking about public information.
Clark and another administrator were concerned about "political sensitivity" when they released the materials ".
He said he was instructed to delay and asked the reporter to submit the question in writing before seeing if the reporter "wanted to screw us ".
"Even if we knew he wanted to lie to us --
Whatever that means
"I don't see any reason for us to hide this information," he said . ".
In the end, the reporter got the contract.
At about the same time, two other journalists requested copies of the judge's fee report.
Parachini said: "The first response is [
Administrative staff of the court
Is to find an excuse to hide this as long as possible, because I fully know that the judges will pick up the weapons.
"He said that he insisted on handing in the materials, but the administrator ordered that the department summary that did not meet the reporter's requirements should be released in the form of" dribs and drabs.
At the same time, the Bay Area News Group is looking for salary information for every employee in the court system to complete the online database of state and university employees.
Investigative journalist Thomas Peel said he
At the end of July, the same request was mailed to each county court system and details how the materials were provided.
When information is handed over by other courts, L. A.
The County Court initially did not respond and later sent him a letter saying they did not accept the email
Mail requests, said Peel.
"My initial reaction was, 'Come on, everyone else can do this by email
Mail, why can't you?
"This is 2010," he said . "
Peel said he was mailed as required, but he was told by a court official that he had never received it.
He sent the second one but has not received the data yet.
In all three cases, Parachini says, the blocked data doesn't seem to have anything disruptive.
He said that there was "no fat cat" on the court payroll and that the judge's expense form showed "nothing to be ashamed.
"Unfortunately, the judges and the courts, as an institution, generally believe that media organizations are inherently malicious towards the courts and want to destroy it," he said . ".
Parachini believes that he supports camera entry in legal proceedings, which also conflicts with his boss.
He was interviewed by the former court TV tru TV to watch a video demonstration of the pro-Court camera broadcast at the court press officer Conference on August.
Parachini told the network that the parties involved in the case soon forgot about the existence of the camera.
The same month, L. A.
The judge found 94.
4% of the judges opposed a national proposal that made it easier for media organizations to install cameras in court.
He said that the judge began to ask, "Are you a media person in the court or a media person in the court?
"My answer is that there are both," he said . "harriet. ryan@latimes.