As a followup to Saturday's story, the Standard-Examiner reports this morning that defense lawyer Randy Richards has filed additional moving papers in the 1/14/12 shooting matter, i.e., papers opposing the prosecution's motion for a gag order in the case:
This morning's story helpfully provides some of the text from these most recently filed papers:
“While defense counsel recognizes the importance of not trying this case in the press, there are some concerns regarding a blanket gag order, given the magnitude of the case and some of the misinformation that has already been disseminated to the press,” Randy Richards wrote in the motion.This is of course the very type of argument that justice-minded lumpencitizens should expect of a zealous defense attorney in a case of this magnitude, especially in a public atmosphere where the local jury pool may already have been tainted by the publication of substantial misinformation which prejudices (and may preclude) a fair trial in this matter.
In the motion, Richards wrote he opposes the gag order as it would hinder “correcting erroneous or adverse publicity.”
As it only would apply to the lawyers involved, “other individuals may release information to the press that could potentially be contrary to the goal of a fair and impartial jury.”
The motion also claims that information has already been released about Stewart that is “potentially misleading and factually prejudicial,” but gave no examples.
“Furthermore, due to the often confusing nature of legal filings, arguments, and orders, occasionally the press gets it wrong,” Richards wrote.
Mr. Richards is Stewart's originally retained private attorney in this case, who is now apparently working pro bono publico in this matter, notwithstanding the prosecution's earlier request that Richards withdraw from the case.
Sodden question: Where are the prosecution's appointed "public" defense council, Ryan Bushell and William Albright with respect to this issue? Will they be joining Mr. Richards in his opposition to a gag order, or will they continue to remain silent throughout this important early pre-trial phase?
Supplementary question: If you or a loved one were charged with a serious crime in Utah, who would you prefer to have defending your interests? The obviously zealous Mr. Richards, or the prosecution's own personally selected public defense lawyers?
