U.S. Attorney's office agrees with a news media request that some material related to the criminal trial can be released, but says other documents, including the names of the unindicted co-conspirators, need to remain under seal despite the end of the trial.
NEWARK--More than a month after the Bridgegate trial ended, many parts of the investigation still remain under seal--although the U.S. Attorney's office has agreed to allow release of some documents sought by the news media.
In a filing late Wednesday, federal prosecutors said much of what was requested must remain confidential--including grand jury testimony and a list of unindicted co-conspirators connected with the scandal. However, they were not opposed to the release of filings connected with a still-unexplained request for a mistrial by the defense during jury deliberations, affidavits that were used to support applications for search warrants, and other material.
"High-profile prosecutions require that a careful balance be struck among competing interests. These include the public's right of access to judicial proceedings and records; the privacy interests of uncharged third parties; the government's investigative prerogatives; and the defendant's right to a fair trial by an impartial tribunal," wrote assistant U.S. attorneys Lee Cortes, Vikas Khanna and David Feder.
The U.S. Attorney's office asked Judge Susan D. Wigenton, who presided over the trial, to review the material in question for a final determination.
The documents were sought in a series of legal filings by a consortium of news organizations, including N.J. Advance Media, before the trial, and in the wake of the mistrial motion.
The news media group argued that the public has the right to see the material under the First Amendment and common law right to access.
In May, the media went to court seeking the the release of names of individuals who allegedly had participated in the conspiracy to shut down lanes at the George Washington Bridge, but were never criminally charged.
Wigenton initially agreed that the public had a right to know who else may have been involved in the high-profile case or subsequent cover-up involving the politically motivated shutdown of local toll lanes at the bridge in 2013, which ultimately led to the criminal convictions last month of Bill Baroni, the former deputy executive director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and Bridget Anne Kelly, former deputy chief of staff to Gov. Chris Christie.
The unindicted co-conspirators were never identified during the trial, but their named were provided under seal to defense attorneys in the case.
"There is very little that is private about the lane closures or the lives of the people allegedly connected to them," Wigenton in her decision. "Further, individuals thus far identified as being involved in the lane closings have been public employees and/or elected and appointed officials."
However, she was later reversed on an appeal by an unnamed "John Doe," who said his rights to privacy were being violated.
In the latest filing, prosecutors said the list of co-conspirators "should remain under seal to protect the reputational and privacy interest of third parties"
The government also called for Port Authority communications that had been disclosed in discovery and redacted from the public record to stay secret, saying the material was found by the court to be protected by attorney-client privilege.
But some affidavits filed in support of the government's applications for search warrants in the case could be released, prosecutors said.
"All of the information addressed in the affidavit excerpts is now public, with the exception of certain aspects that the government proposes be addressed through redaction," prosecutors wrote.
In regard to the mistrial filings, the U.S. Attorney's office said it was appropriate to unseal the documents with limited redactions to address privacy concerns.
"Unsealing the mistrial documents in this manner will disclose the issue that prompted the motion, the court's deliberative process, and the court's basis for denying the mistrial motion, but will protect the privacy considerations that prompted sealing in the first instance," prosecutors said.
Earlier this week, defense attorneys filed motions for a new trial, citing judicial miscues and lack of evidence in the high profile trial--including the decision by Wigenton in the closing arguments and instructions to the jury that prosecutors did not have to show that the lane closure scheme at the George Washington Bridge was one of political retribution, which they said "virtually assured" conviction.
Ted Sherman may be reached at tsherman@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @TedShermanSL. Facebook: @TedSherman.reporter. Find NJ.com on Facebook.