DOJ-OGR-00006984.jpg

be N Ww ws Oo OY ~] oO WO Ww a OY 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE LalWmaxC chilling effect for a other m situati from time. to answer very personal Document 459 ~Filed 11/15/21 Page 12 of 43 12 ny juror who, under oath, is going to have questions, let alone to have to answer those questions in a publ the embers of THE COURT: ons kind of on As an example, ic forum with press being present and public viewing this from an overflow room. My view is we can deal with those depending on what emerges e at a time, the particular questionnaire that we're looking at at the who I have conferred with Judge Donnelly, went through similar voir dire questioning recently in the Bastern District, and there was public access to the individual questioning, and I think all of that was managed in a way that everybody felt comfortable with. First Amendment requires and case law requires, of publ specifi ensure deal I think we s tart with, as the law requires, as the the presumption ic access. I c requests for will take into account, as need be, any deviation in a tailored and narrow way to juror candor, That's my overall approach. I with it in any broader way now, disagre deal wi that is e. and the like. protection of privacy, don't think we need to but tell me if you MS. STERNHE We do not need to th it now. sue. THE COURT: MS. STERNHE M: do not disagree. just wanted to express our concerns on OK. Anything else, Ms. Sternheim? M: Yes. Just a moment, please? SOUTHERN D STR CT REPORTERS, P.C. ( 212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00006984