Prosecutors in the Freddie Gray case have asked again for a protective order to restrict the release of evidence in the criminal case against six Baltimore police officers in the arrest and death of the West Baltimore man — and for a court hearing to discuss the request.
The new motion in Baltimore Circuit Court comes weeks after the evidence in question was released to the officers' attorneys, and repeats prosecutors' concerns that the defense will leak only evidence that supports their clients' defense.
Prosecutors have said they would be willing to have all the evidence in the case posted online, if the defense agreed, but they oppose the piecemeal release of selected evidence by the defense while their office is prevented from releasing evidence in any form.
"The State has no interest in restricting the public's or the press's rights of access to judicial proceedings and information," Deputy State's Attorney Janice Bledsoe wrote. "Certainly, the State expects that the defense will use pleadings to make only good-faith references to discovery material and not to accomplish by pleading what would otherwise violate the Protective Order and what they could not ethically accomplish by other means."
Prosecutors first requested a protective order on evidence last month. Depending on how it was written, the order could allow the court to hold defense attorneys in contempt if they shared evidence outside the order's terms.
Prosecutors filed their new motion in response to a defense filing opposing their request.
The officers' attorneys either declined to comment or could not be reached. Rochelle Ritchie, a spokeswoman for State's Attorney Marilyn J. Mosby, said Mosby's office "will litigate this case in the courtroom and not the media" and declined to comment further.
Gray, 25, died in April after suffering a spinal cord injury while in police custody. His death sparked protests against police brutality. On the day of his funeral, rioting, looting and arson broke out.
Six officers involved in Gray's arrest have been charged with crimes ranging from misconduct in office to second-degree murder. The officers have pleaded not guilty and are set to stand trial in October.
In advance of the trial, the sides have wrangled over several issues. Defense attorneys have asked for Mosby's office to be removed from the case and for the case to be removed from Baltimore. They have also opposed prosecutors' requests for a gag order and the protective order.
Media organizations, including The Baltimore Sun, have also opposed special restrictions on evidence.
Mosby's office has sought to retain jurisdiction in the case and to tamp down publicity that it says could undermine objectivity among Baltimore jurors.
David Jaros, a former defense attorney who teaches law at the University of Baltimore, said prosecutors want a protective order on evidence to control what the public knows about the case ahead of the jury selection — but they could have other motivations.
"Hopefully, it's [out of] a concern for being able to try their case in front of a fair and impartial jury, and not a concern about a little Monday-morning quarterbacking about whether they should have brought these charges in the first place," he said.
Prosecutors might want to keep as much evidence as possible out of the public sphere, Jaros said, so that Baltimore residents' knowledge of the case doesn't become so extensive that the court has no choice but to remove it from the city.
Either way, Jaros said, the prosecutors' continued efforts to control the release of evidence make it seem as if they are "not comfortable with their evidence and that they're trying to sort of escape criticism."
twitter.com/rectorsun