Prosecutors in the death of George Floyd have asked the court to take the extraordinary step of withholding all case filings from public view for at least two days, including the most recent defense filing that detailed his 2019 arrest.
Hennepin County District Judge Peter Cahill scheduled a hearing at 12:30 p.m. Thursday to hear arguments about the prosecution's request. A media coalition, including the Star Tribune, opposes the motion. Multiple legal analysts described both motions as general pretrial jockeying, but said the prosecution's request to seal documents interferes with the public's right to access court proceedings.
At issue was a motion filed Monday by Earl Gray on behalf of his client, former Minneapolis police officer Thomas Lane, who held down Floyd's legs when he was arrested May 25 and died in police custody. Gray wants to include video from an incident on May 6, 2019, when Floyd was a passenger in a vehicle that had been stopped by the Minneapolis police.
According to Gray's memo, three police officers were working to get Floyd to respond to commands to show his hands, stop moving around and spit out something he had put in his mouth. Floyd cried out for his "mama" and told police, "Don't shoot me, man," according to the memo. The behavior was strikingly similar to Floyd's behavior during the arrest that resulted in his death a year later.
The Star Tribune obtained the filing because it's a party in an ongoing dispute over what documents are public in the case. Gray's filing was not released to the public nor did it appear on the public website for the case as of Tuesday, although several prosecution motions filed Monday are listed.
Instead, Gray's motion and the body camera footage from the 2019 arrest remain under seal, apparently because prosecutors filed a motion seeking to bar the immediate release of documents in the case.
Prosecutor Matthew Frank seeks to suppress all motions and exhibits in the case from public view for at least two days. "This will permit the parties to review those filings before they are made available to the public and, if necessary, to notify the Court within two business days of their intent to oppose public disclosure," he wrote.
If the parties oppose public release of the documents, they can request to file briefs and hold arguments on withholding them, Frank wrote. This would ensure that "potentially confidential, prejudicial, or inadmissible information is not improperly or prematurely released," he said.