Motions hearing takes aim at media

A motions hearing originally set to gauge the progress of a double murder case took on a new theme.

Letalvis Cobbins and George Thomas are two of four defendants charged with carjacking, raping, and killing 21-year-old Channon Christian and 23-year-old Chris Newsom in January 2007.

In a motion filed last week, defense attorney Scott Green asked the court to remove him from representing Cobbins or restrain the media from covering the pre-trial hearings.

He's received threats to his family through online message boards on sites like WBIR.com and KnoxNews.com.

He argues the threats are taking away from his ability to provide his client full sixth amendment rights to a fair trial.

"I have a wife, I have children, if they are concerned, it affects my ability to represent Mr. Cobbins, I will not sit by and allow that to happen," Green said.

Judge Richard Baumgartner agreed to hear the motion Friday.

Instead, he focused on fellow defense attorney Thomas Dillard's motion to have the judge bar media sites from allowing comments on the case, force them to screen comments, or require commenters to reveal their names and addresses.

"It is the fact that they are allowed with unfettered access to these blogs, to post these vitriolic, idiotic statements," Dillard said.

Baumgartner told the court he was "not interested" in trying to ban online commenting altogether, so the discussion centered on anonymity for online commenters.

Both WBIR and the Knoxville News Sentinel filed motions to intervene, allowing their lawyers to argue on the media's behalf.

Rick Hollow, the attorney for the News Sentinel, argued blocking the comments would amount to prior restraint - a concept that courts have ruled violates the freedom of the press spelled out in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

"The first amendment protects expression, whether that expression be on the itnernet, whether it be on the page of a newspaper, whether it be on the radio, whether it be on broadcast television, whether it be distributed as a hand-held leaflet," Hollow said.

WBIR's attorney, Tom McAdams, argued that the judge could no more stop anonymous discussion online than the could stop it "at Long's Drug Store."

"James Madison had no idea what a blog was back in the 18th century. He didn' thave a clue what was going to happen 200 years later. I don't think there is a case out there that gives bloggers first amendment protection," Dillard said.

In repsonse to defense attorneys' arguments that the founding fathers didn't consider anonymity when writing the Bill of Rights, McAdams cited the Federalist Papers - a series of articles published in the late 18th century during the debate over the ratification of the United States Constitution, and now considered to be the definitive explanation of the United States' form of government.

The Federalist Papers were written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, but published under the pseudonym "Publius."

"Let's cancel their cell phones, let's close Long's Drug Store, let's take down these websites, let's block postings, let's enter fear with freedom of speech, that's what they're saying. That's what they're asking for, don't let the public comment about this case," McAdams said.

McAdams also said defensive attorneys were essentially arguing, "Well by God, give me his name and address and I'll, I'll... What? What are you going to do with it? If you aren't going to do anything with it then the only purpose was to chill free speech."

Baumgartner is expected to rule on the motions within a couple of weeks.