US Bid To Cut Audio To Honduras Challenged By Inner City Press On 1st Amendment Grounds
On Sunday evening the US Attorney's Office wrote that there should be no audio feed for at least 2 witnesses. This request should have been made weeks ago as in US v. Schulte. Inner City Press opposes
By Matthew Russell Lee, PatreonSongFiling
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - ESPN
SDNY COURTHOUSE, March 15 – Does the right to access to Federal court proceedings extend to listen-only telephone lines, in the time of COVID and beyond? Should it?
The question has been further raised in the ongoing Honduras narco-trafficking case US v. Geovanny Fuentes, which Inner City Press has been covering in-person in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, where it is "in-house press."
On the morning of March 13, Inner City Press filed a challenge to the cut-off of audio access to the US v. Fuentes trial, citing the First Amendment, COVID and real-world politics, see here and below.
Late on the evening of March 14, the US Attorney's Office filed a three page letter into the docket, specifically arguing the the call-in line be eliminated for two entire Witnesses and everything they say. US Attorney's Office's letter, now uploaded on Inner City Press' DocumentCloud, here.
Inner City Press has immediately responded in opposition, here, stating among other things that "the US Attorney's Office seeks to specifically ban public access to two of their Witnesses, while saying that a transcript would be available at some unspecified date afterwards. Given that the Office has yet to unseal improperly redacted portions of their filings, there is little reason to have confidence in the speed of transcription, or that such transcripts would not be too expensive for the public or media. Furthermore, the US Attorney's Office's letter, which Inner City Press is herein specifically opposing with a request for docketing and a written ruling, evidences the very dangers discussed in our March 13 submission: collective punishment, and possibily allowing the supporters of, say, Juan Orlando Hernandez to by uploaded audio discourage public knowledge and reporting of what Witness-1 and Witness-2 testify to. The US Attorney's Office essentially says that because one or a few more individuals broke the rules, all should be punished: collective punishment. It is significant how old their case is: "There is no First Amendment right to broadcast courtroom proceedings. See Estes v. State of Texas, 381 U.S. 532, 539-540 (1965)." But the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees to the public a right of access to court proceedings. U.S. CONST. AMEND. I; Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court, 457 U.S. 596, 603 (1982)....
"That the defense might not object is of no import to the public's and press' right. In fact, many in Honduras have remarked that the defense, so far, seems as intent on defending Juan Orlando Hernandez as on defending this particular defendant. (Inner City Press expresses no view on that expressed opinion, which we would be happy to document to the court during the requested oral argument.) If the US Attorney's Office for the SDNY so routinely seeks to reach beyond not only its District, but the United States, to bring cases, it should not be allowed to argument on little notice to cut off access to those most impacted by the cases and their contents, no matter if these people are beyond the District and clearly cannot come in the overflow room. That the US Attorney's Office does not address the COVID / physical presence in the courthouse issues shows this lack of concern."
Inner City Press after its first filing waited nine hours, including this song, here, to report about it. Full first letter on Inner City Press' DocumentCloud, here.
Inner City Press itself obeys all existing rules and is grateful for the additional access as in-house media (particularly since it is banned from covering the UN, which now Constitutional rights such as the First Amendment exist).
But others have rights too - including journalists and regular citizens of Honduras. If the SDNY prosecutors are going to exercises essentially universal jurisdiction for any wire transfer that passes through lower Manhattan, how ever briefly, they should not oppose access to their trials by those impacted, for better and worse.
Judge Castel is a good judge, in Inner City Press' experience. When petitioned he has ordered the unsealing of certain court documents, in a North Korea crypto-currency conference case and the tech / child sex sentencing of Peter Bright former of ArsTechnica, both of which Inner City Press covered and requested. And Judge Castel is certainly in the mainstream in his March 12 psoition. But should it be rethought? Is there a right? Should there be? Watch this site.
The Honduras narco-trafficking trial of US v. Geovanny Fuentes Ramirez began on the morning of March 9. Inner City Press was there.
Inner City Press live tweeted the first opening argument here. And then the first witness, DEA Agent Brian Fairbanks, to the end of the day, here.
Geovanny Fuentes was sitting at the defense table, with two U.S. Marshals citing six feet behind him. The prosecutors were the table in front, closest to the judge.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge P. Kevin Castel has been asked about docuemnts still sealed in the record, and not yet provided. On the afternoon of March 10, more of the first cooperating witness: Leonel Rivera. Inner City Press live tweeted the morning here and the afternoon here.
On the morning of March 11, Leonel Rivera testified that los Cachiros bribed JOH, and that the defendant told him he had twice paid JOH is cash. Inner City Press live tweeted it, including:
AUSA: Who is this?
Leonel Rivera: Juan Orlando Hernandez, the president.
AUSA: Did the Cachiros bribe Juan Orlando Hernandez with drug money?
Leonel Rivera: Yes. [Si, senior] With $250,000.
AUSA: How was it delivered?
Leo Rivera: In cash. To his sister. USA: What was the bribe for?
Leo Rivera: So that we would not be arrested or extradited. AUSA: Do you recognize this person?
Leo Rivera: Tony Hernandez, the president's brother. AUSA: Gov't offers Exhibit 113. Defense: No objection.
AUSA: What did you give Tony Hernandez? Leo Rivera: I gave him $50,000 in cash. In Tegucigalpa. In a restaurant named Denny's.
The case is US v. Diaz, 15-cr-379 (Castel).
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.
***
La licitación de EE.UU. para cortar el audio a Honduras impugnada por Inner City Press por motivos de la 1ra enmienda
Por Matthew Russell Lee, Carta
TRIBUNAL DE SDNY, 15 de marzo - ¿Se extiende el derecho de acceso a los procedimientos judiciales federales a las líneas telefónicas de solo escucha, en la época de COVID y más allá? ¿Deberia?
La pregunta se ha planteado aún más en el caso de tráfico de narcotráfico de Honduras en curso, Estados Unidos contra Geovanny Fuentes, que Inner City Press ha estado cubriendo en persona en el Tribunal de Distrito de los Estados Unidos para el Distrito Sur de Nueva York, donde es "interno". Prensa."
En la mañana del 13 de marzo, Inner City Press presentó un desafío al corte del acceso de audio al juicio de EE.UU. v. Fuentes, citando la Primera Enmienda, COVID y la política del mundo real, ver aquí y más abajo.
A última hora de la noche del 14 de marzo, la Oficina del Fiscal de los Estados Unidos presentó una carta de tres páginas en el expediente, argumentando específicamente que se eliminó la línea de llamada para dos Testigos completos y todo lo que dicen. La carta de la Oficina del Fiscal de EE. UU., Ahora cargada en Inner City Press 'DocumentCloud, aquí.
Inner City Press ha respondido inmediatamente en su oposición, aquí, declarando, entre otras cosas, que "la Oficina del Fiscal de los Estados Unidos busca prohibir específicamente el acceso público a dos de sus Testigos, al tiempo que dice que una transcripción estaría disponible en una fecha no especificada posterior. La oficina aún tiene que abrir partes de sus archivos que fueron redactadas incorrectamente, hay pocas razones para confiar en la velocidad de la transcripción o que dichas transcripciones no serían demasiado costosas para el público o los medios de comunicación. Además, la carta de la Oficina del Fiscal de EE. UU., Que Inner City Press se opone específicamente en este documento con una solicitud de registro y una resolución escrita, evidencia los mismos peligros discutidos en nuestra presentación del 13 de marzo: castigo colectivo y la posibilidad de permitir que los partidarios de, digamos, Juan Orlando Hernández, mediante el audio subido, desalienten el conocimiento público y informe de lo que testifican el Testigo-1 y el Testigo-2. La Oficina del Fiscal de los EE. UU. esencialmente dice que debido a que uno o un pocos individuos más rompieron las reglas, todos deberían ser castigados: castigo colectivo. Es significativo la antigüedad de su caso: "No existe el derecho de la Primera Enmienda para transmitir los procedimientos judiciales. Ver Estes v. Estado de Texas, 381 U.S. 532, 539-540 (1965)". Pero la Primera Enmienda de la Constitución de los Estados Unidos garantiza al público el derecho de acceso a los procedimientos judiciales. CONST DE EE. UU. ENMENDAR. I; Globe Newspaper Co. v. Tribunal Superior, 457 U.S. 596, 603 (1982) ....
"El hecho de que la defensa no objete no tiene importancia para el derecho del público y de la prensa. De hecho, muchos en Honduras han comentado que la defensa, hasta ahora, parece tan decidida a defender a Juan Orlando Hernández como a defender a este acusado en particular. ( Inner City Press no expresa ninguna opinión sobre esa opinión expresada, que nos complacería documentar ante el tribunal durante el argumento oral solicitado) .Si la Fiscalía de los EE. UU. Para el SDNY busca habitualmente llegar más allá no solo de su Distrito, sino de los Estados Unidos. Estados, para presentar casos, no se debe permitir que se discuta con poca antelación para cortar el acceso a las personas más afectadas por los casos y su contenido, sin importar si estas personas están más allá del Distrito y claramente no pueden entrar en la sala de desbordamiento. la Oficina del Fiscal de los Estados Unidos no se ocupa de los problemas de COVID / presencia física en el juzgado muestra esta falta de preocupación ".
Inner City Press después de su primera presentación esperó nueve horas, incluida esta canción, aquí, para informar al respecto. Primera carta completa en Inner City Press 'DocumentCloud, aquí.
La propia Inner City Press obedece todas las reglas existentes y agradece el acceso adicional como medios de comunicación internos (particularmente porque tiene prohibido cubrir la ONU, que ahora existen derechos constitucionales como la Primera Enmienda).
Pero otros también tienen derechos, incluidos periodistas y ciudadanos comunes de Honduras.
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.
—-