When justice is ill-served by disclosure

Where is it written that justice is always “better served by full disclosure than by secrecy,” or that there is “a necessity for the public to know the facts so that they might have full confidence in the criminal justice system,” as a recent Sun editorial insisted (“No disclosure, no justice,” June 7)?

After reviewing the evidence related to the tragic death of Freddie Gray in police custody, Baltimore City State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby moved quickly and forthrightly to bring charges against six officers.

In order for there to be a fair process “for all parties involved,” which The Sun quoted Ms. Mosby as saying she wanted, it is imperative that the judge and jury be impartial.

That is why she asked for a gag order on any public statements by prosecution and defense attorneys prior to the trial. When information related to the case is revealed to defense attorneys, she doesn’t want to allow them to use it to argue their case first in the court of public opinion.

Does it really serve the interests of justice for autopsy results to be released in advance and possibly re-ignite tensions in a still-simmering city? Would it be better to go ahead and have another riot?

And would it really serve the cause of justice for the officers to be publicly tried in the media before they ever get to court?

The jury, not the citizens of Baltimore at large, will determine the officers’ guilt or innocence. For this reason it is important that the information the jury will hear during the trial not be released ahead of time. There will be plenty of opportunity for the public to hear all the evidence once the trial is underway.

Phyllis and Ralph Hersh, Baltimore