Judge denies request to oust news media from hearing
An Anne Arundel County judge rejected a request from lawyers representing the Capital Gazette gunman to close a Thursday afternoon hearing to the news media after stories on the man’s admission that he plotted to blow up the building where he murdered five people in 2018.
Public Defender Matthew Connell called into question The Capital’s coverage of the trial and asked the presiding judge to issue a gag order barring lawyers involved in the case from speaking to the press.
Circuit Judge Michael Wachs denied Connell’s motion but warned all media covering the proceedings in Annapolis to be responsible, saying news reports could lead to delay if he can’t seat an impartial jury.
“Members of the press are making it more challenging for us to have a fair trial,” Wachs said.
Connell referred to an article about a court hearing Wednesday that revealed new comments made by the man who killed Gerald Fischman, Rob Hiaasen, John McNamara, Rebecca Smith and Wendi Winters. The comments were also reported by the Associated Press and other media in the courtroom this week.
Jarrod Ramos, 41, made the remarks in an interview with a state psychiatrist evaluating his sanity.
Connell said the article was “salacious,” lacked context and highlighted only “the most sensational and prejudicial facts.” Holding up a copy of Thursday’s edition of The Capital, part of Baltimore Sun Media, Connell did not detail which parts he considered objectionable.
“I urge the court to admonish the press not to poison the jury pool,” Connell said.
After denying the request, Wachs said he was surprised by the number of responses to the questionnaire sent to 300 prospective jurors for Ramos’ trial that indicated the person “knew nothing about the case.”
“If I can’t find jurors that are impartial based on media reporting,” Wachs said, he’d have to delay the case.
Prosecutors and defense attorneys at times during Wednesday’s hearing read aloud portions of a Maryland Department of Health psychiatrist’s report on Ramos’ sanity, arguing which parts should be kept from the jury. The report, ordered by another judge, has not yet been made public.
However, the sections heard for the first time Wednesday included statements from Ramos showing he deeply researched the attack, and likened his initial plot to the Oklahoma City bombing, which killed 168 people. Ramos’ remarks provided a glimpse of issues facing jurors who will decide whether the gunman should be held criminally responsible.
Ramos pleaded guilty to all his crimes, which he told the psychiatrist were “indefensible,” but maintains he was insane.
He also pleaded Not Criminally Responsible, Maryland’s version of the insanity defense, which he found “useful” because he thought he’d have more access to a computer and internet websites at a psychiatric hospital rather than a prison. Both revelations of Ramos’ thinking came to light Wednesday.
Defense attorneys have argued that Ramos lacked the mental capacity to be held responsible. Prosecutors contend the planning and detail he exhibited show he was legally sane at the time.
The jury’s verdict will likely determine whether he spends the rest of his life in prison or is committed indefinitely to a state psychiatric hospital. Though jury selection is slated to begin June 23, the trial itself won’t get going until June 29.