Karen Read supporters are fighting for their right to protest as a federal judge weighs whether to block a buffer zone order that limits them from demonstrating outside the Dedham courthouse.
U.S. District Judge Myong J. Joun has taken a motion under advisement from four Read supporters that looks to block enforcement of Norfolk Superior Court Judge Beverly Cannone’s buffer zone order, seeking to restore their First Amendment rights.
“How the hell does a judge have a right to legislate anything outside the courthouse? Hopefully we will be able to figure that out in this case,” Attorney Marc Randazza told reporters outside of federal court in Boston Friday afternoon.
Four Massachusetts residents — Jason Grant, Allison Taggart, Lisa Peterson and Samantha Lyons — are behind the complaint, arguing their protests outside the courthouse have been “peaceful, lawful, and entirely protected by the First Amendment.”
Ahead of jury selection starting this week, Cannone approved a request from Read’s prosecutors that a buffer zone be reinstated for the second murder trial with an expansion that includes where supporters often gathered for the first go-around last year.
Taggart said she and fellow Read supporters are fighting against what they believe is corruption. She added that she believes Cannone is a “little biased towards the Commonwealth.”
“I could see the need for buffer zones sometimes,” Taggart told reporters, “but we have no interest in messing with the jury whatsoever, we don’t want to mess with the trial. We have been pushed down to a residential area, we don’t want to upset the residents. We just want to be able to say what we think is wrong.”
In his arguments, Randazza highlighted how there have been “lots of famous trials” that haven’t needed buffer zones. He expressed concern around how the plaintiffs have been deprived of due process as Cannone imposed the order without allowing them to be heard.
Assistant Attorney General John R. Hitt is opposed to the request that the buffer zone be blocked, arguing that the plaintiffs’ First Amendment claim is “non-existent given that the order is content-neutral and does not restrict speech based on its message.”
Read supporters fought the order last year ahead of the first trial, but the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court upheld the buffer zone, keeping supporters and opponents at least 200 feet away from the courthouse.
The buffer zone did not prevent a crowd from growing and supportive honking from passersby, which jurors could hear from the courtroom.
Cannone approved special prosecutor Hank Brennan’s buffer zone request, citing the possibility of Read’s “right to a fair trial” being “jeopardized” due to the hordes of supporters holding signs and chanting.
Brennan had argued the noises “could be influential, intimidating, concerning” and asked for buffer zone adjustments to prevent the jury from being influenced by outside factors.
Ten jurors have been chosen for the retrial’s jury after the first four days of selection, making no further progress from day three. Cannone is looking for at least 16 before testimony begins.
Rendazza is also representing Read supporters Tom Derosier and Michael Bryant, described in a civil rights complaint as “independent journalists,” in a fight against Massachusetts State Police for “unlawfully barring them from engaging in constitutionally protected newsgathering” near the courthouse.
“We are willing to be reasonable, but when the police aren’t reasonable, that’s what the courts are for,” Rendazza said.
Originally Published: