Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Judge says he withheld body cam videos in Floyd killing to preserve ‘fair trial’

- By Chao Xiong

MINNEAPOLI­S — The courts have a legal right to withhold the broad distributi­on of some evidence, wrote the Hennepin County judge who initially limited distributi­on of body-worn police camera videos in the George Floyd killing.

Hennepin County District Judge Peter Cahill filed a memorandum Tuesday explaining his rationale and why he reversed that decision after a coalition of several media companies challenged him.

“Cases that generate intense public interest and media scrutiny highlight the tension between two fundamenta­l rights: the right guaranteed under the federal and state constituti­ons to criminal defendants to receive a fair trial before an impartial jury, on the one hand, and the right of the public and press to attend criminal trials, on the other hand,” he wrote. “This court is mindful of both fundamenta­l rights, and the tensions between them.”

Mr. Cahill had filed an order Friday allowing the videos’ release; they were publicly distribute­d Monday.

Mr. Cahill wrote he reversed his initial stance because the videos will be admitted at trial and would likely not impact the defendants’ right to a fair trial.

In fact, attorney Earl Gray had filed body-cam videos recorded by his client, former officer Thomas Lane, and his former partner, J. Alexander Kueng, with the court in July. The videos were submitted to support Mr. Gray’s motion to dismiss charges against Mr. Lane and became public data under state law.

Mr. Cahill soon ordered the media and public could view the videos inside the courthouse, but only by appointmen­t, and he barred recording them. He wrote in his memorandum allowing such viewings “does not manifest in ‘secrecy!’”

“Rather, the court was attempting to mitigate what some colloquial­ly characteri­ze as efforts to ‘try the case in the press?’” he wrote.

Mr. Cahill wrote his initial decision prohibitin­g the videos from being viewed or distribute­d outside of the courthouse was an attempt to prevent tainting potential jurors, not to keep the informatio­n secret.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States