Ruling: Extrajudicial statements are already governed by the provisions of the Utah Rules of Professional Conduct
As a followup to the 2/11/12 story, reporting that the prosecution had requested a gag order in the Matthew Stewart shootings matter, the Standard-Examiner reports that 2d District Court Judge Hyde has finally gotten around to ruling on the prosecution's motion:
Judge Hyde's ruling is spot-on, wethinks, inasmuch as (just as we opined on 3/7/12), extrajudicial statements are already governed by the provisions of Utah Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3.6.
And while we're at it, let's not overlook Rule 3.8, which also imposes special obligations upon the prosecutor's office.
Comments anyone?
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
4 comments:
Hear the crickets chirping?
Welll... at least we gots a new board troll... right, Shirrell?
Crickets? No.
A Cockroach? Yes.
Seems Smith may be violating subsections (d) and (e). But the judge does not seem interested in holding him to it. You can report an attorney to the bar, but the bar won't investigate until the underlying case is resolved and over. So now what?
Post a Comment