Supreme Court Seals Komisarjevsky Witness Lists

The Connecticut Supreme Court has overturned a lower court ruling and ordered that witness lists in the Joshua Komisarjevsky trial must remained sealed.

The Hartford Courant had sought the release of the witness lists on the grounds that they were court documents and that the right of public access to trial documents is essential to ensuring fair trials.

But defense lawyers for Komisarjevsky, the second Cheshire home invasion defendant to stand trial, argued that releasing the witness lists publicly might expose witnesses to threats and intimidation, which would jeopardize Komisarjevsky’s right to a fair trial.

Komisarjevsky faces the death penalty for the notorious triple homicide in 2007. His co-defendant, Steven Hayes, was convicted last year and sentenced to death row.

The case has generated more media publicity than any other crime in Connecticut history, experts have said. 

The battle over the witness lists began in March as jury selection started. Because of the large number of potential witnesses, Superior Court Judge Jon C. Blue, the trial judge, ordered prosecutors and defense lawyers to prepare written witness lists so jury panelists could see if they were acquainted with any of them.

If a prospective juror knew a witness, it would disqualify the juror from serving on the jury. The same procedure was used in the Hayes trial last fall.

When Hartford Courant reporter Alaine Griffin requested the release of the witness list, Blue ordered the list sealed and conducted a hearing on the matter. At the end of March he ordered it unsealed, but issued a stay to give the defense time to challenge his ruling.

Since then, numerous additional court rulings have gone against Komisarjevsky as his defense attorneys appealed the matter up to and beyond the Appellate Court. Each time the stay was extended.

In a decision issued Friday, the Supreme Court overruled Judge Blue’s decision stating the defense had not proven that releasing the witness lists would jeopardize Komisarjevsky’s right to a fair trial.

The Supreme Court also overruled the Appellate Court decision that the defense could not appeal Blue’s decision until after the trial was over.

"With respect to the merits of the trial court’s decision," the Supreme Court decision states, "we conclude that the trial court improperly determined that the defendant had not sufficiently demonstrated that the disclosure of the witness list could impair his rights to a fair trial and to prepare a defense. We further conclude that the defendant demonstrated that the potential abridgement of these rights clearly outweighs the right of the intervenors and the public to access this document."

The court was swayed partially by news coverage by the Courant itself. After the owner of a small restaurant who had employed Hayes as a dishwasher testified in the penalty phase of his trial about his demeanor as an employee, the Courant reported the owner became the target of death threats and an attempted business boycott.

In addition, Public Defender Thomas Ullmann, who represented Hayes, provided an affidavit detailing death threats aimed at himself and others associated with Hayes’ defense.

Blue granted a motion by the Connecticut Children’s Law Center to seal the name of Komisarjevsky’s nine-year-old daughter, whose name appears on the witness lists as a potential witness.

Komisarjevsky's trial is expected to begin in mid-September.