Site search
sponsored by
Home
News
ENLARGE
Bryant's attorneys Pamela Mackey, front, and Hal Haddon, right, arrive at the Eagle County Courthouse in Eagle on Thursday for a hearing before Judge Frederick Gannett concerning sealed documents and evidence in the sexual assualt case against Bryant.
Judge Fred Gannett listened to more than three hours of argument Thursday afternoon between media attorneys seeking to have the contents of the file made available to the public, and defense attorneys and prosecutors who want the file kept under wraps until the trial.
If granted, the file would make available arrest warrants, search warrants, affidavits and supporting evidence. Gannett said he would not hand down his ruling until Aug. 6, or later.
In a related matter, Gannett denied a motion to waive Bryant's Aug. 6 court appearance to be advised of his rights. Gannett's decision requires Bryant to appear at 4 p.m. Wednesday in Gannett's court.
Glorious rhetoric
Both sides put forth what Gannett called "glorious rhetoric," along with examples of case law to support their positions.
"The media will have that opportunity when it's presented on the witness stand," said Harold Haddon. "It can be released in due course, and I suggest that the due course is at the trial."
Haddon said the affidavits "deal with a sexual encounter between two human beings and the graphic details of that encounter."
Rohn Robbins, attorney for Colorado Mountain News Media and the Vail Daily, one of the media outlets requesting that the file be opened, dismissed Deputy District Attorney Greg Crittenden's argument that public access to the file's contents would taint the jury pool. Crittenden said "giving the media access would cause irreparable harm to the defendant and others involved in this case."
"Historically, jurors have always risen to the task," said Robbins. "Jurors are not immune from forming opinions. I submit that it's healthy for jurors to form opinions, as long as they check them at the door, as jurors always have.
"The public has an unequivocal, contemporaneous and immediate right to the public's information," he added.
Media attorney Chris Beall, who represents NBC, The Denver Post and the Los Angeles Times, said that after an arrest and charges are filed, there is a practice in Colorado to open those records to public access.
"That's the default position," said Beall. "The public has a right to know what its government is up to." Beall added that the precept is especially true in investigating crime and adjudicating crime.
Admissible to public?
Haddon said the public's right to the information in the file stopped at what is admissible in court. He said that not only were the file's contest's "massively prejudicial," but almost none of the information in the file was admissible, asserting that it was "second- and third-degree hearsay."
"The media will do what the media does - broadcast it," he said.
Haddon added that opening the file means attorneys in the case will be duty bound to repeatedly discuss the information on television and in the rest of the media.
Beall said those seeking to keep the files sealed must show that it would cause imminent harm.
"Those seeking to seal the file must show that opening the document would harm the fair trial right, and that closing those records would preserve it," said Beall.
Crittenden asserted that opening the file violates both the alleged victim's and the defendant's right to privacy. He said that each time the specifics of the case are broadcast on television or printed in newspapers and magazines, the alleged victim would be "re-victimized over and over again."
Foundation of freedom
"Secrecy is one of the elements of Old World tyranny," said Robbins. "To quiet the press is to quiet the voice of this nation."
While the rights of a free press and free speech bang up against the defendant's right to a fair trial in this case, it's hardly the first time, Robbins said.
"There has always been tension. There have always been abutting rights," said Robbins, who added that the question had been settled in the 1940s.
Haddon quoted a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said the right to a fair trial is the most fundamental freedom and "must be maintained at all costs."
In his closing arguments, Robbins said "justice must not be prosecuted in the shadows."
Robbins said a jury from this area would be more accountable because it is small and neighbors would hold each other to a higher standard. He said it would not more susceptible to being prejudiced by pretrial information based on the contents of the investigation file.
"This jury pool is equal to the task," he said. "Simply, the jury must rise above the noise. This case is of higher notoriety, but it does not follow that juries will be of lower integrity."
Bryant can't skip court date
Randy Wyrick
KOBE
Los Angeles Lakers star Kobe Bryant will be in Eagle County court next week after his attorneys lost a request to waive his first court appearance.
Eagle County Judge Fred Gannett rejected a request from Bryant's attorneys, Harold Haddon and Pamela Mackey, that would have allowed Bryant to skip his 4 p.m. Wednesday, Aug. 6, court date. That is the first of what is certain to be a long legal ordeal for both the defense and the prosecution.
Bryant, 24, faces one count of felony sexual assault stemming from a June 30 incident in which he is accused of raping a 19-year-old Eagle woman. Bryant admitted he had sex with the woman but denies sexually assaulting her. He is free on $25,000 bond.
Gannett has also ordered a limit on public comment about the case by attorneys, authorities and others associated with the court, including Bryant and any witnesses. He called his ruling a proactive measure.
In his media decorum order, Gannett said the news media cannot photograph or interview any witness, juror, potential juror or the alleged victim and her family on the courthouse grounds. In his ruling, he said anyone violating his order could be expelled from the proceedings.
If granted, the file would make available arrest warrants, search warrants, affidavits and supporting evidence. Gannett said he would not hand down his ruling until Aug. 6, or later.
In a related matter, Gannett denied a motion to waive Bryant's Aug. 6 court appearance to be advised of his rights. Gannett's decision requires Bryant to appear at 4 p.m. Wednesday in Gannett's court.
Glorious rhetoric
Both sides put forth what Gannett called "glorious rhetoric," along with examples of case law to support their positions.
"The media will have that opportunity when it's presented on the witness stand," said Harold Haddon. "It can be released in due course, and I suggest that the due course is at the trial."
Haddon said the affidavits "deal with a sexual encounter between two human beings and the graphic details of that encounter."
Rohn Robbins, attorney for Colorado Mountain News Media and the Vail Daily, one of the media outlets requesting that the file be opened, dismissed Deputy District Attorney Greg Crittenden's argument that public access to the file's contents would taint the jury pool. Crittenden said "giving the media access would cause irreparable harm to the defendant and others involved in this case."
"Historically, jurors have always risen to the task," said Robbins. "Jurors are not immune from forming opinions. I submit that it's healthy for jurors to form opinions, as long as they check them at the door, as jurors always have.
"The public has an unequivocal, contemporaneous and immediate right to the public's information," he added.
Media attorney Chris Beall, who represents NBC, The Denver Post and the Los Angeles Times, said that after an arrest and charges are filed, there is a practice in Colorado to open those records to public access.
"That's the default position," said Beall. "The public has a right to know what its government is up to." Beall added that the precept is especially true in investigating crime and adjudicating crime.
Admissible to public?
Haddon said the public's right to the information in the file stopped at what is admissible in court. He said that not only were the file's contest's "massively prejudicial," but almost none of the information in the file was admissible, asserting that it was "second- and third-degree hearsay."
"The media will do what the media does - broadcast it," he said.
Haddon added that opening the file means attorneys in the case will be duty bound to repeatedly discuss the information on television and in the rest of the media.
Beall said those seeking to keep the files sealed must show that it would cause imminent harm.
"Those seeking to seal the file must show that opening the document would harm the fair trial right, and that closing those records would preserve it," said Beall.
Crittenden asserted that opening the file violates both the alleged victim's and the defendant's right to privacy. He said that each time the specifics of the case are broadcast on television or printed in newspapers and magazines, the alleged victim would be "re-victimized over and over again."
Foundation of freedom
"Secrecy is one of the elements of Old World tyranny," said Robbins. "To quiet the press is to quiet the voice of this nation."
While the rights of a free press and free speech bang up against the defendant's right to a fair trial in this case, it's hardly the first time, Robbins said.
"There has always been tension. There have always been abutting rights," said Robbins, who added that the question had been settled in the 1940s.
Haddon quoted a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said the right to a fair trial is the most fundamental freedom and "must be maintained at all costs."
In his closing arguments, Robbins said "justice must not be prosecuted in the shadows."
Robbins said a jury from this area would be more accountable because it is small and neighbors would hold each other to a higher standard. He said it would not more susceptible to being prejudiced by pretrial information based on the contents of the investigation file.
"This jury pool is equal to the task," he said. "Simply, the jury must rise above the noise. This case is of higher notoriety, but it does not follow that juries will be of lower integrity."
Bryant can't skip court date
Randy Wyrick
KOBE
Los Angeles Lakers star Kobe Bryant will be in Eagle County court next week after his attorneys lost a request to waive his first court appearance.
Eagle County Judge Fred Gannett rejected a request from Bryant's attorneys, Harold Haddon and Pamela Mackey, that would have allowed Bryant to skip his 4 p.m. Wednesday, Aug. 6, court date. That is the first of what is certain to be a long legal ordeal for both the defense and the prosecution.
Bryant, 24, faces one count of felony sexual assault stemming from a June 30 incident in which he is accused of raping a 19-year-old Eagle woman. Bryant admitted he had sex with the woman but denies sexually assaulting her. He is free on $25,000 bond.
Gannett has also ordered a limit on public comment about the case by attorneys, authorities and others associated with the court, including Bryant and any witnesses. He called his ruling a proactive measure.
In his media decorum order, Gannett said the news media cannot photograph or interview any witness, juror, potential juror or the alleged victim and her family on the courthouse grounds. In his ruling, he said anyone violating his order could be expelled from the proceedings.
