In advance of a Friday hearing on making the names of the jurors in Rod Blagojevich‘s federal corruption trial public, prosecutors filed a motion Monday seeking to maintain the jury’s anonymity until after the trial.
The motion cited the media spectacle surrounding the trial to bolster its case, mentioning, among other things, a Blagojevich-themed show by Second City and the sale of trial-related merchandise, “including t-shirts distributed by the Republican party” as well as “cell phone ring tones, distributed by a Springfield, Illinois newspaper.”
The U.S. Attorney’s office also referenced instances of people with no ties to the trial attempting to involve themselves in it. The government noted one incident — which largely flew under the radar — involving a woman named Tynetta Muturi, who was arrested and charged with criminal contempt of court on June 23 after trying to enter the courtroom against deputy marshals’ orders. Muturi, who was sentenced to one year of probation, had previously filed documents seeking $10 billion and, according to the motion, “the release of certain files relating to an investigation into the theft and sale of her grandchildren, which documents were allegedly taken from defendant Rod Blagojevich’s office by the government in the course of its investigation of the charged offenses.”
In their motion, federal prosecutors outlined nine examples of impermissible juror contacts from older trials and the government’s experience in the trial of former Illinois Gov. George Ryan, where a Chicago Tribune investigation led to the dismissal of two jurors.
“As this Court recently suggested,” the motion states, “the fact that the Court represented to the prospective jurors in this case that their identities would be protected until verdicts were reached militates strongly in favor of continuing to withhold public disclosure of the jurors’ names. It is highly likely that the jurors viewed the Court’s representation as a promise affecting their well-being, and will almost certainly view a change at this juncture as reneging, thereby diminishing their respect for the Court, as well as the Court’s instructions.”