Court Tells Journalist Barrett Brown He And His Lawyers Can't Talk To The Press Any More

from the that's-insane dept

We just wrote about the ridiculousness of Barrett Brown's case, in which he's been in jail and facing a very long sentence mainly for copying a URL from one place to another, but also because the feds have been seeking a media gag. Tragically, the court has now granted that gag order. Neither Brown nor his legal team is allowed to speak to the media:
No person covered by this order shall make any statement to members of any television, radio, newspaper, magazine, internet (including, but not limited to, bloggers), or other media organization about this case, other than matters of public record, that could interfere with a fair trial or otherwise prejudice Defendant, the Government, or the administration of justice....
This gag order seems somewhat ridiculous. The idea that having Brown or his legal team talking to the press would somehow unfairly bias the jury in his case is ridiculous. It's perfectly reasonable to expect Brown and his legal team to try to draw attention to the ridiculousness of the case, and the only purpose of this sort of gag order is to silence the press and keep the story from getting the kind of attention it deserves, as yet another example of prosecutorial overreach by the DOJ.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    Gothenem (profile), Sep 4th, 2013 @ 5:54pm

    Definition of Media

    "No person covered by this order shall make any statement to members of any television, radio, newspaper, magazine, internet (including, but not limited to, bloggers), or other media organization about this case, other than matters of public record, that could interfere with a fair trial or otherwise prejudice Defendant, the Government, or the administration of justice.... "

    This is a court statement that Television, Radio, Newspaper, Magazine, AND Internet (including, but not limited to bloggers) are all media (by the words or other media, suggesting that all the previous are part of media). Maybe this will finally put to rest statements like "Bloggers are not journalists". Since this is an official court stance, it can be called into other court cases as being "on the record". Perhaps Senator Feinstein needs to expand her Shield law (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130807/13153224102/sen-feinstein-during-shield-law-debate-real-j ournalists-draw-salaries.shtml) to include all of the above. Otherwise, the courts need to drop Internet (including but not limited to bloggers) from their order.

    You can't have it both ways. Either bloggers are journalists or they are not. You can't have them be journalists when it suits your purpose, but when it doesn't suit your purpose, suddenly they aren't.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      That One Guy (profile), Sep 4th, 2013 @ 5:59pm

      Re: Definition of Media

      You can't have it both ways. Either bloggers are journalists or they are not. You can't have them be journalists when it suits your purpose, but when it doesn't suit your purpose, suddenly they aren't.

      You forget, changing definitions to suit the argument and hypocrisy are politician specialties, they very well do believe they should get to have it both ways.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Sep 4th, 2013 @ 11:28pm

      Re: Definition of Media

      While I sympathize with your underlying politics, I don't think the incidental inclusion of blogging under journalism, as opposed to being listed next to journalism, is an essential feature of the order. It does not serve any important legal purpose that the next judge would not be willing to give up. So I doubt that it establishes any precedents. You can't get so much mileage of of these incidental remarks.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      art guerrilla (profile), Sep 5th, 2013 @ 8:32am

      Re: Definition of Media

      i will bang the drum for my new meme:
      reporters, etc should have no rights SUPERIOR to all of us nobodies: they are acting as OUR proxies, therefore, they have the SAME rights as each of us as individuals have, and vice versa...

      in effect, we are ALL 'reporters' as citizens, only: there are some people (AND corporations) who act (supposedly) on OUR BEHALF as proxies for getting/disseminating information, attending meetings/pressers/ etc, that is IMPOSSIBLE for all of us regular citizens to make time to do...

      we ALL have the same rights The They (tm) are trying to eliminate for both citizens AND citizens-as-reporters; it is of a piece...

      as far as i'm concerned, there is NO RIGHT/mechanism THE STATE has to dissuade, discourage, or criminalize the gathering and reporting of facts WE ALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO... it is only because we live in a specialized society, that we have some citizens doing the work for us which we ALL would ordinarily have the right to do, period, period, period...

      art guerrilla
      aka ann archy
      eof

      WE ALL get access to public documents, NOT JUST reporters; WE ALL get access to public meetings, etc, NOT JUST reporters; WE ALL enjoy 'shield laws', 'protecting sources', etc 'rights', NOT JUST reporters...

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Coyne Tibbets (profile), Sep 8th, 2013 @ 8:16pm

      Re: Definition of Media

      The government has no problem with double-think. A perfect example is privacy, which they breach with bland disregard when it's to their advantage...but when it's to the people's advantage, all of a sudden, "We must protect individual privacy!" There are dozens of other examples of this type of double-think; all it takes is a us-versus-them mentality and a guileless expression.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    That One Guy (profile), Sep 4th, 2013 @ 6:15pm

    And check off another box in the 'Is your country a police state/dictatorship?' list

    Secret courts, secret rulings, secret laws, and now secret cases where the defendant is not allowed to present their side of the story to the public.

    Looks like the DoJ learned their lesson from cases like Swartz's, that if you're going to railroad someone into a verdict of your choosing, things go much easier if the public is kept in the dark about the details.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      haiku, Sep 4th, 2013 @ 10:15pm

      Re: And check off another box in the 'Is your country a police state/dictatorship?' list

      A shorter list would be: why my country is not a police state / dictatorship

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    C Tatge, Sep 4th, 2013 @ 7:00pm

    Phreespeech is phor phools

    Welcome to the Republic.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Hephaestus (profile), Sep 4th, 2013 @ 8:44pm

      Re: Phreespeech is phor phools

      You mean empire, in a republic you are represented and the courts work correctly.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 12:21am

        Re: Re: Phreespeech is phor phools

        No, America is now a Democratic Republic.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Pragmatic, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 3:39am

          Re: Re: Re: Phreespeech is phor phools

          If America was indeed a Democratic Republic, wouldn't we have actual democracy? What we've got is a shrinking pool of choices between "bad" and "worse," and the people aren't being represented or properly informed, so they're not really able to take part in political decision-making since they don't really know what's going on, beyond what their favorite media outlets tell them.

          If it wasn't for Techdirt, would we ever have heard of PIPA and SOPA before they came to public attention? I doubt it.

          My point is, on paper you may well be correct, but in practice, that's gone. What we've got is an illusion, and even that's beginning to fade as the realities of living in a police state kick in.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Pragmatic, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 3:39am

          Re: Re: Re: Phreespeech is phor phools

          If America was indeed a Democratic Republic, wouldn't we have actual democracy? What we've got is a shrinking pool of choices between "bad" and "worse," and the people aren't being represented or properly informed, so they're not really able to take part in political decision-making since they don't really know what's going on, beyond what their favorite media outlets tell them.

          If it wasn't for Techdirt, would we ever have heard of PIPA and SOPA before they came to public attention? I doubt it.

          My point is, on paper you may well be correct, but in practice, that's gone. What we've got is an illusion, and even that's beginning to fade as the realities of living in a police state kick in.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:26am

          Re: Re: Re: Phreespeech is phor phools

          You misspelled the word Democratic - Republican and failed to add shit hole.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 4th, 2013 @ 7:03pm

    What happened to freedom of speech?
    It's almost like North Korea except they let their people know they don't give a fuck about them or their rights.. If they fight them they'll be murdered along with their entire family for pissing off "dear leader".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), Sep 4th, 2013 @ 7:12pm

    So this is how we administrate justice now.
    Secret laws, secret hearings, secret courts, secretly gathered intel whitewashed via other channels, secret rulings, all done in the most 'transparent' way possible.

    Don't you dare point out to the public that this case is about someone posting a URL and the massive overreaction to punish someone we had a hardon over!

    This is where we are today.
    They ignored the law in RojaDirect, Dajaz1, MegaUpload.
    They piled on charges against people who spoke out about the witch hunt against them.
    And now your no longer allowed to say anything that might make people question the legal system and its enforcers.

    This is not democracy, this is not how the legal system was designed to operate, this is a Government hellbent on bullying anyone that might make them look bad with the truth.

    Maybe the real solution would be for the Government to stop doing all of this shit that makes them look like the dictators they threaten to bomb.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 4th, 2013 @ 7:26pm

    Gag orders happen all of the time to keep cases from being tried in the media... you know to preserve objectivity? Why is this case "special"? Could it be because Brown, is facing a very long sentence mainly for copying a URL from one place to another which is a total trivialization of charges you simply don't like.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 5:47am

      Re:

      "Gag orders happen all of the time to keep cases from being tried in the media"

      Gee wiz, it must be ok then.

      Do you have one example of a situation where a gag order makes sense? Not simply because it happens all the time, but a reasonable rational for hiding court proceedings from the public. I can't think of any, but then I'm not an expert like yourself. btw, what percentage of all court cases are subjected to gag orders - I'm curious what constitutes "all the time".

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        nasch (profile), Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:00am

        Re: Re:

        a reasonable rational for hiding court proceedings from the public.

        The proceedings are a matter of public record; those are explicitly excluded from this gag order, and I assume all others as well.

        Not that I think this is a good idea, but the order prohibits them from making "any statement... that could interfere with a fair trial". The problem I see with that is it's overly broad - "could" interfere. A lawyer might successfully argue that almost anything could interfere with a fair trial. But if were worded a little better, such as "would be reasonably likely to interfere", then would that be such a big deal?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:35am

          Re: Re: Re:

          "The proceedings are a matter of public record; those are explicitly excluded from this gag order, and I assume all others as well."

          I thought the proceedings were also hidden, similar to those of the secret courts, otherwise what does a media gag order do for them?

          It would be a strange situation if everyone, including the media, is ordered to not talk about something when it is a matter of public record.

          I'm not sure how this contributes to a "fair trial".

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            nasch (profile), Sep 5th, 2013 @ 10:17am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            I thought the proceedings were also hidden, similar to those of the secret courts, otherwise what does a media gag order do for them?


            All the court proceedings, unless specifically put under seal, are a matter of public record. So they could mention any of that to the press, but couldn't say anything else that "could interfere with a fair trial".

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 4th, 2013 @ 7:27pm

    Apologies, *impartiality; not objectivity*

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Pixelation, Sep 4th, 2013 @ 7:28pm

    Our future

    The good news is we will have an alternative party to the Democrats and Republicans, the bad news is it will be the Gag order.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Travicane, Sep 4th, 2013 @ 8:52pm

    Star Chamber justice for all!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Watchit (profile), Sep 4th, 2013 @ 9:39pm

    I purpose we make wild speculations until they release the gag order.

    I've heard they're actually torturing Barrett! It's impossible to prove me wrong!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      completely anonymous, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 11:29am

      Response to: Watchit on Sep 4th, 2013 @ 9:39pm

      You know, interrogation with out the right to silence is considered torture

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Craig (profile), Sep 4th, 2013 @ 10:31pm

    At the rate our government is going we might beat North Korea to the bottom of the hill. Even if we could somehow put the brakes on, the sheer mass of what is going on will take us to the bottom. Every single day I think how much worse can it get; and then it gets worse. I also thought that Bush jr. would be considered one of the worst presidents ever, not so much anymore. I am truly shocked by what is happening to my country and the president that sets for the rest of the world. I wonder is it just me, maybe I'm too old to understand, (55), maybe this is just a phase we will outgrow, maybe it's not as bad as I see it, but then why do I feel like my front door might come crashing in some night with masked men in black body armor, M16's, and a warrant from a secret court, for what; a comment on the web? Why would I feel like that in a country that spends $52 billion plus dollars for my safety? Think of the children they say, and I do think of the children and the meager budget our schools have to live with. How much does an intelligence analyst make compared to a middle school teacher and how many lives does he enrich in his career of world domination. Ok, ok I know he might find a terrorist plot once in his career, sometime, and save some lives, maybe. How many intelligence analyst does it take to make us safe? How many terrorist plots are there to be discovered? How many analysts for each actual terrorist? Why is the word terrorist used like McCarthy used the word communist?

    And; why are people that seek the truth and are interested in bringing to light the wrongs, and yes, crimes of our leaders being persecuted?

    Because they can.

    Because its easier to go after "little people" than it is to go after real criminals who run the banks, the government, and the military/intelligence industrial complex.

    I have to go, I heard a Humvee in the front yard.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      nasch (profile), Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:01am

      Re:

      I also thought that Bush jr. would be considered one of the worst presidents ever, not so much anymore.

      Just because there's been another president you consider worse doesn't mean he's not one of the worst. He still is.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:30am

        Re: Re:

        You people lack of history is appalling.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          kitsune361, Sep 6th, 2013 @ 6:56am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Should probably have said "... worst president of my lifetime..." Most people have only an abstract idea of how bad presidents they never experienced are.

          That said, I thought Bush Jr. was bad and then Obama comes along and really raises the bar. People are getting pretty bipartisan in their disdain for the executive these days.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          nasch (profile), Sep 6th, 2013 @ 7:35am

          Re: Re: Re:

          You people lack of history is appalling.

          Surveys of historians pretty consistently rank Bush Jr. in the bottom quartile of US presidents. What I find strange is that at least one ranks Obama as 15th best.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      completely anonymous, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 11:38am

      Response to: Craig on Sep 4th, 2013 @ 10:31pm

      Lol, I think you understand more/better than most. "When the government fears the people, there is freedom, but when the people fear the government there is tyranny" :)

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Cloudsplitter, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 7:13pm

      Re:

      Speak the Truth and Shame the Devil, as they use to say, the only reason the government wants silence, is to hide the truth, for Brown the choice is simple except their gag, or shout to the heavens, what are they going to do, give him more time.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    The Old Man in The Sea, Sep 4th, 2013 @ 11:01pm

    Is this not a first amendment violation?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    velox (profile), Sep 4th, 2013 @ 11:04pm

    Regional differences in Gag orders

    This gag order would never have been issued if it was coming from a state within the 3rd, 6th, 7th or 9th Districts. Unfortunately Texas is in the 5th District which happens to allow the most restrictive, and at the same time the most weakly supported gag orders in the country. Based on what you can read here, here, and here, it seems unlikely that the 5th Appellate Court would overturn the gag.
    Given the split between the Districts, at some future time, the standard for the issuance of a gag order will probably have to be reviewed by SCOTUS.
    Are there any lawyers here who could comment on what kind of case it would take to get a SCOTUS "cert" on this issue any time soon?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    jingoi, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 1:43am

    You heard it here readers! WE ARE FUCKED! Time to off myself before the NWO is complete.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 1:55am

    anyone care to elaborate on why the courts are now doing whatever they can to aid the DOJ in it's quest to own everyone and everything that it wants?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 2:38am

    OJ's trail was televised, but this kid's trial is gagged and conducted in secret? Talk about absolute corruption in the judicial system!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Capt ICE Enforcer, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 3:50am

    All this because a person decided to pirate a url instead of purchasing a license for it. So sad the life of those who steal.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Todd Andersen, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 4:36am

    an alternative response

    I am reminded of a running joke from the early days of SNL when doing their review of the week's news. Each week we were informed that "Franco is still dead." Could not a similar set of stories "Brown is still gagged" be used to streisand the matter?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    The Real Michael, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 5:17am

    Ha ha

    The very first thing I'd do is hold a press conference for the media.

    As if I'd ever respect the wishes of tyrants. Not a chance.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      nasch (profile), Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:13am

      Re: Ha ha

      The very first thing I'd do is hold a press conference for the media.

      And the second thing you would do is go to jail for contempt of court.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 5:44am

    If the author here harbors strong feelings about this case, it does seem a bit odd that he has apparently not expressed his feelings in a letter to the federal district court judge advising the judge that the order is ridiculous and its grant tragic. Why limit his views to just here where nothing can happen when he can go to the source and press for real change?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 5:58am

      Re:

      And you know this has not been done, exactly how?

      It does seem a bit odd that you apparently have strong feelings about this case and choose to express them by making snide remarks on a blog, about what the blogger has not done, while not providing any evidence nor reference to what it is that you have done thus demonstrating your superiority complex is warranted.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:34am

        Re: Re:

        No, I merely make note of the fact that the author's expertise in matters such as this is sorely lacking, and using such declarative terms makes this only too clear. Circumspection would be more appropriate, but for some reason circumspection does not resonate.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:46am

          Re: Re: Re:

          "author's expertise in matters such as this is sorely lacking"

          Other than your opinion, this is based upon what? Extra credit for examples.


          Why, when one uses declarative terms, do they need to be an expert?


          "circumspection does not resonate"

          Apparently bullshit does.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          GT, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 12:42pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          "the author's expertise in matters such as this is sorely lacking"

          Objection: DECLARATIVE

          "Circumspection would be more appropriate"

          Objection: DECLARATIVE

          "circumspection does not resonate"

          Objection: DECLARATIVE

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          JMT (profile), Sep 5th, 2013 @ 1:44pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          "...I merely make note of the fact that the author's expertise in matters such as this is sorely lacking..."

          And I'll merely make note of the fact that you've provided absolutely no evidence that your expertise in matters such as this even exists. All you done is make yourself sound like as ass.

          If you have an argument to make, make it.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 12:19pm

      Re:

      You have a remarkable skill for acting superior to everyone while pretending not to.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Jasmine Charter, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:00am

    Judges who should be put into stocks...

    So judges like this need to be taken to the public square and put into stocks for a few days for blatant abuse of power and breaking their oath to uphold the Constitution.

    It's utter B.S. that this case needs a special gag order when it's of INFINITELY lower impact that the Travone Martin case, which involved an actual DEATH of a human being... not 40+ characters of a URL posted.

    But judges are just as corrupt as everyone else in office and don't want their dirty laundry aired either. They don't want people to see the injustice they help to perpetrate for not dismissing ludicrous charges with prejudice.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:19am

    Page from Masnicks book

    Nothing like stifling free speech, or using censorship to gain you power !!!..

    How's your Google page hit cheque been past few weeks Mick the Nick ??

    I guess that's a small price to pay for the power to censor and supress freedom of speech..

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:22am

    As Masnick like to use MAC address CENSORSHIP, something for him to be proud of. That way he can "HOLD FOR CENSORSHIP" for as long as he likes. To ensure there is not such thing as freedom of speech or freedom from CENSORSHIP or the ABUSE OF POWER, that Masnick has tasted, AND HE LIKES IT !!!!!

    Once you have the abuse of power in your blood it's hard to break the habit !!!! Right Masnick ???

    "This comment HELD FOR CENSORSHIP". MY your ruler Mr Masnick, wielder/abuser of power

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Sep 6th, 2013 @ 11:30pm

      Re:

      Dude, he can't see your MAC address from across the web, only nodes / devices on the same network can see it using ARP (Address Resolution Protocol). Apart from your ISP, the many routers between you and techdirt never see your MAC address.

      You are completely full of shit.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:30am

    A gag order is no more an abuse of power as a gag order on free speech or gaging reasonable comments, even ones you don't agree with..

    But it's ok when mansick gags people he does not agree with, he likes the power, and abuses it when he can, but only to gag comments he does not agree with, or from people he does not like.

    That's the lowest form of abuse of power, "Im going to censor EVERYTHING from this person, because he does not believe everything I say, and catches me out lying too often"..

    Nice work Masnick, you're children will be so proud.

    I'm sure your followers fully support your abuse of freedom of speech and censorship..

    I guess the power is more valuable to you than your reputation !!!!..

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Digger, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:41am

    Listen up lawyers...

    Get the press to hire an intermediary - someone who isn't a reporter.

    They will bring the reporters queries to you, you answer the intermediary's questions, they give the answers and other information to the press.

    Problem solved, and you followed the letter of the law and the illegal order.

    Free speech, freedom of the press - fuck the judge (with a disease ridden, broken glass dildo).

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 5th, 2013 @ 10:28am

    It may be another century before the legal system feels comfortable with this new thing called super highway of information.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Jeff Brodhead (profile), Sep 5th, 2013 @ 6:40pm

    What is with Texas and judges?

    Thought I was going to find out that this story came from the E.U.

    ...but NOOOOoooooOOOooooo! Texas.


    (BTW: TechDirt, I know everyone has [Submit] buttons, even whiteOUThouse.gov has a [Submit] button on their "comment" page AND IT IS RATHER irritating to click [Submit], when one is already irritated! justsayin )

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Sep 6th, 2013 @ 6:06am

    The goal of every trial is to seek an impartial trier of fact (jury if the trial will be held before a jury) and trier of law (judge, who may also serve as trier of fact if trial is a bench trial, i.e., trial held without a jury). In any trial, be it civil or criminal, both parties, and this includes the people, as represented by the prosecution in criminal trials, have the legal right to an impartial judge and jury, and a court is fully empowered and required to ensure to the best of his/her ability that impartiality is secured.

    Obviously, counsel for the two parties generally want partial judges and juries, partial to their cause. The concept underlying gag order is to prevent as much as possible the opportunity for counsel to inject partiality into the process.

    Is a gag order appropriate here? Without the benefit of the entire evidentiary record that was before the judge it is difficult, if not impossible, to arrive at an informed opinion. Because the evidentiary record is generally lacking unless one is sitting in the courtroom hanging on every word and thoughtfully reviewing every piece of evidence presented to the court, using words like tragically and ridiculous should be accompanied with at the very least a brief discussion of the evidence presented to the court when asked to issue a gag order.

    While such orders are not the norm, they are not uncommon in cases where counsel or their proxies have demonstrated a willingness to negatively impact the goal of impartiality by what they have been doing outside of the courtroom.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This