Remove the gag
Stifling witnesses is contrary to free speech
It was bad enough that Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen J. Zappala Jr. cloaked in secrecy the criminal case against the man accused of murdering an off-duty Pittsburgh police officer in July.
Then, the county’s chief prosecutor made matters even worse by seeking and securing a gag order that doesn’t just muffle the mouths of court personnel associated with the case, but also silences any witnesses and even
“likely” witnesses.
Shame on Mr. Zappala and shame on the judge who granted the DA’s request, Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Kevin G. Sasinoski. His order was filed Sept. 18.
Christian Bey is charged with first-degree homicide in the July 14 fatal shooting of Officer Calvin Hall, in Homewood, who died three days later.
Instead of proceeding through the usual public course, Mr. Zappala — with judicial approval from Common Pleas Judge Jill Rangos — put the case through an indicting grand jury, a secret system.
The alternative — the filing of a probable cause affidavit and the convening of a preliminary hearing, both in the public domain — was forgone in favor the secret grand jury. District attorneys surrounding Allegheny County rarely, if ever, use the grand jury — a measure that should be a remedy of last resort to be used only in cases where there is a clear need for the kind of secrecy that flies in the face of presumptive judicial openness and constitutionally guaranteed due process.
Grand juries are notoriously slanted toward prosecutors.
Now comes another slap in the face of the U.S. Constitution: a gag order.
The attorney for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press put it well. “Gag orders are considered a form of prior restraint because they bar people from talking about a case despite their First Amendment right to do so,” Sarah Matthews said. “When a gag order broadly applies even to potential witnesses who have not been notified that they must testify, the gag order is particularly troublesome from a First Amendment perspective and likely to be unconstitutional.”
Mr. Zappala is a sworn officer of the court and should cherish the rule of law and the mission of upholding it. He should move to rescind the gag order and Judge Sasinoski should agree.