BALTIMORE — A defense attorney for State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby said Friday that a contempt of court finding is “unwarranted” because quoting from jury questionnaires would not interfere with a fair trial, given the pretrial publicity around the case.
Attorney A. Scott Bolden’s response comes after U.S. District Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby asked the defense why she shouldn’t hold them in contempt of court for revealing confidential juror information in a recent filing that included information from juror questionnaires.
In a previous filing in opposition to a gag order, Bolden cited jury questionnaires that said about 30% of prospective jurors have made up their minds about her case. Bolden said in the latest filing that the information did not identify jurors, and argued that the jury pool was already tainted because of the extensive media coverage of the case.
The filing did not say whether the respondents who said their mind was made up thought Mosby was guilty or innocent.
Mosby, who unsuccessfully ran for a third term as the city’s top prosecutor, is charged with two counts each of perjury and making false statements on loan applications. Her trial was postponed until March.
Bolden is accused of violating Rule 204, which states that an attorney “shall not directly or indirectly release ... any information or opinion concerning any imminent or pending criminal litigation” if it could result in an unfair trial. The rule also says that counsel “shall not give or authorize any extra-judicial statement or interview, relating to the trial or the parties or issues in the trial, for dissemination by any means of public communication.”
Bolden said in Friday’s filing that he used quotations from the juror questionnaires “both to respond to the government’s contentions, analysis, and interpretations about the same juror questionnaires and to illustrate that a problem already existed; namely, that pretrial publicity already had tainted the jury pool for these proceedings.”
Bolden’s response said that the government’s filings have also “disclosed information about and drew conclusions from the juror questionnaires. This, in turn, supports the conclusion that nothing in the rule suggested that the use of information gleaned from the juror questionnaires could run afoul of Local Rule 204.”
Federal prosecutors asked for a “gag order” in the case last month after Bolden complained when Mosby’s trial was postponed to March while addressing media on the courthouse steps.
Prosecutors argued his comments amounted to an attempt to taint the jury pool by repeating the defense’s discredited claims that the case against Mosby is the result of prosecutors’ disdain for her.
“This case should be tried inside the federal courthouse, not on its steps,” prosecutors wrote.
They argue that Mosby lied about suffering financial hardship from the coronavirus pandemic to withdraw money from her city retirement savings account early and without penalty. She used the approximately $81,000 to purchase a pair of properties in Florida: an eight-bedroom rental near Disney World and a condo on the state’s Gulf Coast, according to her indictment.
Bolden said in Friday’s filing that there are not specific rules prohibiting the “use of anonymized references to juror questionnaires.” He cited the District of Maryland Jury Plan, which only prohibits the release of “identifying information,” such as names, addresses, and employment.
The filing concludes, “both the government and the defense referred to the juror questionnaires and discussed substance of those questionnaires, without disclosing any ‘identifying information.’”
