Paul Flores’ attorney is wrong. We’re covering Kristin Smart case as news — not ‘entertainment’
Well, that was a low blow.
In a court hearing this week, the attorney representing Paul Flores — the man accused of killing Cal Poly student Kristin Smart — referred to certain members of the news media as “the entertainment industry, infotainment industry, maybe news.”
Maybe news?
How about a little respect, counselor?
We recognize that your client is your top priority, but that doesn’t give you leave to denigrate members of the news media who have been covering the high-profile trial in Monterey County.
They, too, have an important role to play not only in detailing what occurs in the courtroom each day, but also in providing insight into what’s happening behind the scenes and what might be expected as the trial unfolds.
That’s been especially challenging in this case. Documents have been sealed for months, and a gag order has prevented reporters from getting even the most basic information from court personnel.
That’s both ridiculous and arbitrary.
A news media coalition made up of The Tribune, ABC News, the Los Angeles Times and the Associated Press filed a motion to unseal the documents and post them online, where they would be accessible both to the press and interested members of the public.
There has been enormous public interest in the trial of Flores, who was arrested 25 years after Smart disappeared from the Cal Poly campus after attending a party. Flores was the last person seen with her.
The prosecution alleges that Flores killed Smart during a sexual assault and then hid her body with the help of his father, Ruben Flores, who is also on trial.
In response to the motion filed by the news media coalition, Judge Jennifer O’Keefe agreed last month to unseal hundreds of documents and ordered attorneys to provide lists of the documents they wish to remain sealed, along with the justifications for doing so.
The District Attorney’s Office was late in submitting its list, and defense attorneys didn’t submit them at all.
It’s disappointing that the defense, in particular, places such a low priority on transparency.
The court should set a high bar for sealing documents. Otherwise, it would be too easy for attorneys to simply claim that the release of even the most mundane paperwork could jeopardize a case.
Attorneys should respect that, rather than pontificating about wanting their clients tried in a court of law, rather than the court of public opinion.
Measures already have been taken to ensure the defendants’ right to a fair trial, including moving it to Monterey County, where there was less publicity about the Smart case.
Sanger is an experienced attorney who has handled several high-profile cases, including the criminal trial against the late Michael Jackson. He should recognize, at this point in his career, that the press and public have a fundamental right to know what’s going on in the courtroom.
Withholding information is not going to prevent coverage, though it may result in accounts that are less clear and less comprehensive.
The request to unseal documents was not made with the intention of keeping the masses “entertained” — a suggestion that’s insulting both to the media and to the public following the case.
Rather, the action was taken to help ensure that reporting of the Kristin Smart trial is as accurate and complete as possible — something that’s in everyone’s best interests.