The
press attention focused on the custody case involving Richard Reams, Beverly
Seymour, and the child Tessa Reams was overwhelming. Finally, Tessa's Guardian ad Litem filed a motion seeking to
enjoin the parties from communicating with the press. I conducted a hearing on
this motion, which was attended by a television crew from Fox News. At one
point, the Guardian and a reporter from Fox nearly came to blows in the courtroom.
I pounded my seldom used gavel so hard I feared it would break.
The Fox reporter made a statement
opposing the motion, while a Dispatch
reporter attended the hearing but had nothing to say. Beverly Seymour testified
that, "I am doing everything I can as her mother to strengthen my
position." In her opinion, increased public attention would bolster her
case and was in Tessa's best interest. Norma Stotski, Tessa's biological
mother, testified that she was asked to appear on the Geraldo program with Beverly.
A licensed psychologist testified at
the request of the Guardian that a child who is the subject of a custody
dispute faces a "high probability" of emotional damage, and that
substantial publicity about the case would increase the probability of harm.
Therefore, the publicity sought by Beverly was not in the child's best
interest.
A few hours after the hearing, I
entered an order enjoining the adult parties, their counsel, and agents from
“disseminating any information about this pending cause or about the minor
child Tessa Reams to any and all persons * * * including, but not limited to,
representatives of both the broadcast and print media; and * * * from appearing
on any and all radio and television broadcasts regarding these causes or the
minor child herein; and * * * from otherwise providing any information
regarding these causes or said child either directly or indirectly in any
fashion whatsoever.”
Shortly thereafter, the Guardian
filed a motion seeking to close further proceedings in the case by excluding
the public and press from future hearings. Again, I conducted a hearing to
consider this motion. A social worker assigned to the case testified as an
expert witness that press coverage of the trial would potentially be harmful to
Tessa, since it would expose her to negative allegations about the people she
considered her parents. Counsel argued that the presence of the press and
public could inhibit the presentation of significant evidence due to the
potential of harm to the child.
The managing editor of the Columbus
Dispatch testified to the benefits of permitting the press to observe and
report on the proceedings. He pointed to the American tradition of open
courtrooms and minimized the impact of any harm to the child in comparison to
the public's "right to know."
I returned to my chambers and wrote
an opinion, finding that “the interests
in protecting Tessa Reams and in a full judicial exploration of all relevant
evidence bearing on her best interest in the custody dispute are overriding and the presumption in favor of
openness is overcome in this case. * * *” I ordered that “the trial and all
other proceedings in this matter shall be closed to all news media and members
of the public, except parties, witnesses * * *, counsel, and necessary court
personnel. * * *” I also closed access to the case file to all but the participants
in the case.
The Columbus Dispatch immediately appealed the gag order and the
closure order to the Court of Appeals. The Dispatch
sued me individually, requesting that the Court of Appeals prohibit me from
enforcing my orders. The Court of Appeals held that my orders were
unconstitutional because a risk of substantial harm to Tessa had not been
demonstrated and therefore the Dispatch's
access to the proceedings was unduly limited. I was prohibited from enforcing
the orders.
The Guardian ad Litem and I both filed appeals from the Court of Appeals
decision in the Supreme Court of Ohio, which agreed to hear the case. The Dispatch was represented by Jones,
Reavis & Pogue, a high-powered, large law firm. I was represented by an
assistant Franklin County Prosecutor whose office represents public officials
in lawsuits related to their official duties. The Franklin County Public
Defender's office and the Guardian ad
Litem represented Tessa Reams. Amicus
(Friend of the Court) briefs were filed by the Ohio Newspaper Association,
Beverly Reams, pro se, The Ohio
Association of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, the Ohio Association of
Criminal Defense Lawyers, and the Federation for Community Planning.
All proceedings were held in
abeyance awaiting the decision of the Supreme Court. On June 13, 1990, that
decision was announced.
No comments:
Post a Comment