FEDERAL COURT,
August 1 – While January 6
cases like US v. Guy Reffitt
have from their beginnings
been available to cover by
public call-in phone lines,
now the US v. Reffitt trial
and its guilty verdicts had no
call-in lines.
On March 8 after
three hours of deliberation
Reffitt was found guilty of
all five felony counts,
including obstruction of an
official proceeding, carrying
a firearm during the attack
and threatening
witnesses. Reffitt faced
a maximum of 20 years in
prison from the obstruction
counts alone. All the
more reason to have a call-in
line.
But he was
convicted in a trial with no
call in line, and on August 1
with no call in line - despite
the CARES Act provisions for
call in lines being extended
at least through November -
Reffitt was sentenced to 87
months in prison.
On March 9 -
while Judge Friedrich held a
criminal proceeding about
crack with a public call in
line - this was docketed:
"MINUTE ORDER. On or before
March 10, 2022, the parties
shall file any objections to
the Court unsealing the
following portions of the
trial record: (1) the parties'
March 1, 2022 email to the
Court summarizing their
respective juror strikes; (2)
all bench conferences (except
for those related to alleged
victims and medical issues);
and (3) the inquiry that took
place on March 4, 2022 and
referenced an alternate juror.
So Ordered by Judge Dabney L.
Friedrich on March 9, 2022"
Inner City Press
on February 3 requested a
public call-in line, in
writing, here.
It has covering the case from
the beginning, here.
It continues to cover other
January 6 cases, for example
US v. Hale-Cusanelli on
February 28, here.
But also on February 28, jury
selection in US v. Reffitt
began, with no call-in line.
Late on
March 1, Judge Friedrich
docketed this: "MINUTE ORDER.
Before the Court is Matthew
Russell Lee's email [117]
Letter, which the Court
construes as an application
requesting that the public
call-in line be open during
trial. The Court just
discovered this in its spam
email box. For the reasons
stated on the record on
February 28, 2022, Lee's [117]
application for public call-in
is DENIED. So Ordered by Judge
Dabney L. Friedrich on March
1, 2022. (lcdlf2)."
But
of course, since there had
been and still is no call-in
line, the basis of Judge
Friedrich's decision was not
available to Inner City Press.
Thanks to a colleague in DC,
Inner City Press now has the
February 28 transcript, in
which Judge Friedrich said:
"the public line will be
closed during trial under
Federal Rule of Evidence 615.
Witnesses are excluded from
the courtroom so that they
cannot hear other witnesses'
testimony. This rule serves to
prevent one witness from
shaping his testimony to match
that given by another witness
at the trial. Tasty Baking
Company v. NLRB, 254 F.3d at
122 to 23. If the public line
were to be open, there would
be no way to monitor whether
trial witnesses were listening
by phone. The public line will
also be closed during voir
dire to respect the privacy of
the venire members whose
presence is compelled and who
must answer questions about
their personal lives and
views. The Court concludes
that the access outlined above
is more than sufficient to
qualify this trial as an open
and public proceeding."
We disagree. The
balance between public and
unsubstantiated fears about
witnesses (or, seemingly, a
single witness, Reffitt's
unflipped daughter) has been
misapplied.
And on
March 7 it emerged that the
prosecutors are NOT calling
the daughter, Peyton Reffitt,
as a witness. So this
rationale for excluding the
public is done. But it
proceeding to closing
arguments with no public
call-in line - and a
diversion, echoing
Judge Rakoff on Sarah Palin v.
NYT in the SDNY, about push
notification as a basis to
defer running on a Rule 29
motion.
Inner City Press
has now put Judge Friedrich's
Reffitt jury instructions on
its DocumentCloud here,
after "Minute Entry for
proceedings held before Judge
Dabney L. Friedrich:Jury Trial
as to GUY WESLEY REFFITT held
on 3/7/2022. Same jury and
alternates. Parties give
closing arguments. Court
excuses alternates. Jury
Deliberation set for 3/8/2022
at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 14- In
Person before Judge Dabney L.
Friedrich. Bond Status of
Defendant: Remains Committed;
Court Reporter: Sara Wick
& Lorraine Hermann;
Defense Attorney: William
Lawrence Welch, III; US
Attorney: Jeffrey S. Nestler
and Risa Berkower. Witnesses:
Adam Descamp, Thomas Ryan and
Matthew Flood." We'll have
more on this but for now this
from the exhibits, and
consider this, from CNN:
"Judge Dabney
Friedrich will also allow one
family member of defendant Guy
Reffitt to sit in the
courtroom during the
proceedings. The decision
gives the public, ultimately,
more access to the
atmospherics of the trial, and
will insure everything that is
said and done in the courtroom
is witnessed by people who are
not part of the trial itself.
'The journalists we represent
appreciate the court making
sure that the public receives
in-person accounts of this
historic trial, as the First
Amendment requires,' attorney
Charles Tobin, whose law firm
Ballard Spahr who represented
a coalition of media groups
including CNN, said Tuesday."
So a family member can be in,
anyway. We fail to
appreciate...
For now, we'll
report that Judge Dabney
Friedrich told prospective
jurors to turn off their
phones for news alert
notifications - an echo of the
Sarah Palin v. New York Times
fiasco in the Southern
District of New York (where
the US v. Lev Parnas trial,
for example, was available
worldwide by call-in
line).
On the UN
beat, with Inner City Press
also covers, prospective juror
# 16 seems to be the stepson
of Kelly Craft, US
Ambassador to the UN under the
previous Administration. We'll
have more on this.
***
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a
month helps keep us going and grants you
access to exclusive bonus material on our
Patreon page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 20047, Dag
Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2022 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
,
