Court cautions attorneys on publicity

A Supreme Court justice who is weighing three lawsuits against the Albany Diocese has cautioned the lawyers involved not to seek publicity for their clients or their cases.

Judge Joseph C. Teresi said that he was issuing the caution for two main reasons: "to assure that the trials of these cases and any future cases are...fair," and "to protect the integrity of the jury panel who will eventually sit on cases."

The decision was issued Feb. 10 in Albany County Courthouse. Michael Costello represents the Diocese; John Aretakis represents the plaintiffs.

Emotionalism

After trying to get the attorneys to make "a gentleman's agreement" to abide by judicial codes about publicity, the judge said, "I haven't heard counsel, particularly counsel for the plaintiff, make a representation that he fully intended to adhere to that rule....[He] said he was not going to change and that he believed he was going to continue to do what he felt was right."

The court noted that use of certain words in the media -- "scandalous," "pedophile," "pedophile priest," "fraud" -- "clearly relate to the character, credibility and reputation of a party or witness in this case."

While recognizing that attorneys can become emotional about their clients and the issues involved in the cases before him, the court said that for the plaintiff's attorney, "advocacy has gone at some moments beyond emotional....If it is counsel that are getting emotional about the issues here, it certainly isn't going to take much to get the public, or a potential juror, emotional about this case."

'Prejudicial'

The court also commented on the inability of the plaintiff's counsel "to make a statement which is not likely to be prejudicial and material"; "to avoid statements which relate to the character, credibility and reputation of any party or witness"; and to avoid giving out "information which that counsel knows...is likely to be inadmissible as evidence at a trial."

The judge said he was "particularly troubled" by Mr. Aretakis' saying in a newspaper article that the cases will be tried in the "court of public opinion."

Said the court: "That is the last place we want these cases tried....We want [them] tried in open, public court following the rules of evidence and the court rules."

Further criticism

He also criticized the plaintiff's attorney for comments that led the media to seek "opinions and analysis" from outside parties, such as mental health professionals.

While the court recognized that it had "no jurisdiction over...some professional like a psychologist that might be quoted in the media,...this Court believes that those things are just as dangerous [in] impinging upon the integrity of the jury panel."

The court also cautioned all parties that the characterization "of a claim [against a priest as] being credible or incredible" could also be a violation of the disciplinary rule.

(02-20-03) [[In-content Ad]]