The judge presiding over the case against the remaining members of the “Broadview Six” demanded Wednesday that prosecutors involved in the redaction of controversial grand jury transcripts appear personally in her courtroom for a closed-door hearing Thursday.
The surprise order from U.S. District Judge April Perry demands the appearance of “any” assistant U.S. attorney “who participated in the decision to redact portions of the grand jury transcripts, whether on the trial team or at the supervisory level.”
The judge also wrote that, “due to the anticipated discussion of grand jury materials,” and in an effort to avoid tainting the jury pool, “the proceedings will be conducted under seal.”
A spokesperson for U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros’ office could not immediately be reached. Grand jury proceedings are traditionally treated as sensitive and handled behind closed doors.
It’s unclear what prompted Perry’s order, but it seems like bad news for prosecutors six days before trial is set to begin.
Charged in the case are former congressional candidate Kat Abughazaleh, Oak Park village trustee Brian Straw, 45th Ward Democratic committeeperson Michael Rabbitt and Andre Martin, who served as a member of Abughazaleh’s campaign staff. Each is charged with a misdemeanor count of forcibly impeding a federal agent. Charges against two other people previously indicted in the case have been dismissed.
The transcripts in question have been a point of controversy for weeks, ever since prosecutors announced their intention to drop a felony conspiracy charge previously leveled against the defendants. While that seemed to signal good news for the defendants, their attorneys suspected it was a ploy to avoid disclosing an unredacted version of the transcript to the judge.
Defense attorneys made a “narrow” request in early April to review only the portions of grand jury transcripts that showed how prosecutors explained the conspiracy law to the grand jury.
Alternatively, they suggested prosecutors turn transcripts over to Perry so the judge could conduct her own review. The judge agreed to give them a look, and prosecutors filed transcripts, under seal, of grand jury appearances from Oct. 9, Oct. 16 and Oct. 23.
The original indictment was handed up Oct. 23.
The feds filed the transcripts April 23. The next day, the judge entered an order scheduling a hearing April 29. She also told prosecutors “to bring to the hearing fully unredacted versions of the transcripts [they had] filed under seal … as well as a copy of any presentation(s) or document(s) shown to the grand jurors summarizing the law.”
But moments into the April 29 hearing, Assistant U.S. Attorney William Hogan disclosed the feds’ plan to drop the conspiracy charge and file a new charging document. Perry wound up denying the defense motion for grand jury transcripts as moot — and concluding there was no reason to read the transcripts.
Defense attorneys have continued to push for disclosure of the transcript in the weeks since, though. Straw attorney Chris Parente urged Perry on Monday simply to look at an unredacted version, arguing that prosecutors may be hiding something that “could have tainted all of this.”
Perry agreed after prosecutors said they had no objection.
In fact, prosecutors have accused defense attorneys of speculating “histrionically” about what might be in the transcript, insisting there was nothing “nefarious” about what happened.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.