Every other media outlet did, even BostonNow, but WHDH was enjoined by a court ruling in a case brought by the firefighters' union. The Outraged Liberal discusses that:
... I'm no fan of 7News, with its over-the-top emphasis on crime, mayhem and the latest "thing." I find their style to be overly aggressive and their heated pursuit of what I think to be non-stories as annoying.
But, to single then out is wrong. Whether we like it or not, this is a legitimate story. And as we have learned from CSI and the other shows of its genre, evidence doesn't lie. The odds on mixing up the samples, even in a medical examiner's office as screwed up as the one in Suffolk County, are astronomical.
[Judge] Hopkins ruled that one news outlet could not report the kind of news we don't like to hear -- that even heroes are mortal human beings. That ruling is a bigger abomination than reporting the facts.
Dan Kennedy is shocked by the ruling:
By stopping WHDH-TV (Channel 7) from reporting on autopsy reports that allegedly show two Boston firefighters killed in an August restaurant blaze had abused drugs and alcohol, Hopkins violated the most basic of First Amendment protections — the protection against prior restraint. ...
The courts - right up to and including the U.S. Supreme Court - have consistently ruled that when a confidential document ends up in the hands of the media, there's nothing that can be done about it. The legal responsibility is on the keepers of those documents not to release them; the media, by contrast, have no legal obligation not to report on them. ...
Oh, my: Were Tai Ho firefighters drunk, on coke?