Copyright © 1999, The Austin American-Statesman

Jason Spencer, A trial by jury, not the media//Legal experts say court-imposed gag order will help yogurt shop case., 12-19-1999.

 

From here on out, any information the public hears about the yogurt shop slayings will come from court proceedings and not lawyers and witnesses sounding off to reporters, thanks to a judge imposed gag order. On the day last week that Travis County prosecutors announced plans to seek the death penalty against one of the men accused of killing four teen-age girls in 1991 in a north Austin yogurt shop, state District Judge Mike Lynch decided to publicly silence those involved in the case. It was an unusual move, but one that legal experts say is justified in light of the heavy media cloud that is sure to hover over Robert Burns Springsteen and the three other suspects until their cases are decided in court. ``While lawyers have First Amendment rights to speak, lawyers as officers of the court have special access to information, and because of that, the court should have a little more authority to essentially shut the lawyers up in an effort to serve the interests of the justice system,'' said Brian Serr, a Baylor Law School professor of criminal law and criminal procedure. ``In other words, let's try this case in court, and let's not try it in the press." Law officers rounded up Springsteen, Maurice Pierce, Michael Scott and Forrest Welborn in October and charged them with killing Eliza Thomas, Amy Ayers and sisters Jennifer and Sarah Harbison in December 1991. The girls were shot during a robbery of a North Austin I Can't Believe It's Yogurt store, which was then set on fire.

The lawyer for Springsteen, the only suspect so far indicted in the case, has said he will challenge the gag order. The restriction against making public statements is an undue imposition on First Amendment rights to free speech, attorney Joe James Sawyer said. Sawyer's hope of having the order lifted is surprising, said David Reynolds, a 24- year courtroom veteran who chairs the Austin Criminal Defense Lawyers Association. ``I'm surprised the defense is against it, and I can' t imagine what favorable evidence they might be throwing around in the press,'' Reynolds said. ``I'd want (a gag order) if I were the defendant, because the press has been negative, and it's prejudicial, and there's been a lot of jumping to the conclusion that the four of these guys are guilty. . . . I'd want a gag order to put a stop to that." The U.S. Supreme Court has granted trial judges broad authority in issuing gag orders when they are necessary to protect the integrity of a trial, Serr said. Recent history has shown what can happen when judges fail to rein in talkative lawyers out to manipulate public opinion, he added. ``The O.J. case was a joke. The lawyers were out there right away trying to condition and influence the public, and there's a problem with that, because the evidence is not what the lawyers say. The evidence is what comes out in court,'' he said. ``You want the jury to be making a decision that's based on the evidence that comes out in court and not because of exposure to pretrial publicity. That's the concern, and it's only the high-profile, highly publicized cases that even generate that problem."

Once a gag order is in place, attorneys and witnesses can publicly discuss certain general aspects of the case, said Ken Anderson, Williamson County district attorney. Restrictions imposed in gag orders like the one issued by Lynch generally do not put any more limitations on the attorneys than those imposed by standard law ethics, he said. That explains why Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, hours after the gag order was imposed, was within its limits when he held a news conference Tuesday announcing that the grand jury had indicted Springsteen. ``There ought not to be any lawyers making extra-judicial statements about the case to begin with,'' Anderson said. ``What the lawyers are allowed to say is spelled out. It's basically the bare bones of what the charge is and who is accused and when the settings are." By halting the flow of pretrial publicity, the gag order should also lessen the possibility of a change of venue, Anderson said.

 

Copyright © 1999, The Austin American-Statesman

Jason Spencer, A trial by jury, not the media//Legal experts say court-imposed gag order will help yogurt shop case., 12-19-1999.

You may contact Jason Spencer at jspencer@statesman.com or 445 3605.