1989-03-24 Comments of Star Tribune.pdf - Minnesota Judicial Branch

1. Too much pretrial publicity.
Table 4
Basis of Objection
2. Defense attorney felt coverage would hurt client’s right to
a fair trial.
3. Writ filed in district court.
4. Prejudicial to defendant, trial jurors may be tainted.
5. A still photographer took pictures of defendant in the
courtroom prior to start of proceedings without permission.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Were
No
Yes
Table 5
Ruling of Court
Overruled-- The rule change of several years ago divested the
tour t of control over courthouse hallways. It was more
orderly and improved security to have cameras in the
courtroom rather than the hall.
Another judge allowed limited media coverage and I honored
that allowance at the preliminary hearing.
Petition for Writ denied.
Motion denied.
Further coverage may be refused.
Table 6
you aware of any disputes as to pooling of coverage?
Judge
100%
0
Total 100%
Was any extra lighting organized?
Judge
No 64X
Yes 16%
No Response 20%
Total 1OOZ
Table 7
Page 8