« Ind. Courts - "On graduation day, a diploma and a cleared criminal record" | Main | Ind. Courts - More on: Familiar names suspended from practice »

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Ind. Courts - "Media barred from Lay custody trial"

Kate Braser reports today in the Evansville Courier & Press:

The news media is being barred from attending court proceedings related to the custody cases of two children of a couple accused of murder in the death of their son, Kalab Lay.

The announcement was made Monday after Vanderburgh Juvenile Court Judge Brett Niemeier learned a motion for a temporary stay, filed by Amanda Brooks Lay's attorney, was granted by the Indiana Court of Appeals.

Niemeier previously had denied the motion.

A hearing has not been scheduled by the appeals court, and the order will remain in effect until then. * * *

In an order issued April 14, Niemeier opened the proceedings to the media.

In the order, he wrote the court was granting access to the media so the public could gain insight into the workings of the court and Department of Child Services.

Niemeier cited specific Indiana Code stating a juvenile judge may grant "any person having a legitimate interest in the work of the court or in a particular case access to the court's legal records."

Erin Berger, an attorney representing Brooks Lay in the juvenile court proceedings, filed a motion to correct error on April 16. In the order, she asked the judge to reconsider his decision and not allow reporters to attend.

Berger wrote that Brooks Lay "objects to the release of information relating to the Child in Need of Services cases, to the background and current living and financial situation of the maternal grandmother and to the placement of the children."

She said "the privacy interests of the children and the parents outweigh any interest the general public may have regarding information that was not already published before April 14, 2008."

Referring to the intense public interest in the case, Berger wrote, "A mob mentality calling for vigilante justice, created by for profit, front page news reporting does not establish a compelling interest in the release of confidential information."

Berger went on to say that if the media had requested access to several cases to conduct a study of the workings of the juvenile court, "then the media may have been acting in the public interest."

"However, here, the media went after a specific individual in a specific case to continue to keep the case in the headlines. It would be in error to hold that sensational and commercial profit outweigh the children's right to privacy with regard to events in their own lives."

Niemeier denied her request on May 27, stating, "The court believes it is in the best interest of the community to allow access to these cases. The court's grant of limited access to Kalab's siblings' cases pales in comparison to the access that this court has to grant under Indiana law to the death concerning Kalab."

Niemeier added the media access did not violate the parents' criminal rights, and "it should not go unnoticed that in these cases the children have been proven to be children in need of services due to the actions of the parents. Any deterrent effect that the publicity in this case might generate only helps other children in this community."

For background, see this ILB entry from April 20th titled "If the public is to not only understand the procedures in place for protecting children from abuse and neglect, but also to influence change in those procedures when necessary, it must have information"

Posted by Marcia Oddi on June 10, 2008 09:34 AM
Posted to Indiana Courts