update on nizah morris case
Philadelphia Gay News, PA, USA
New court procedural rule may help open Morris records
by Tim Cwiek
02.27.09 - 08:00 am
A new state Supreme Court procedure that makes search warrants available to the
public applies retroactively to the six warrants issued in the Nizah Morris
investigation, a local judge said recently.
In a Jan. 16 letter to PGN, Municipal Court Judge Louis J. Presenza said state
Supreme Court Rule 212 applies to search warrants issued in the Morris case six
years ago, even though the new rule didn’t go into effect until last August.
Presenza said the rule wasn’t meant to be retroactive, but court officials are
applying it retroactively to the Morris case because of a May 2008 Common Pleas
Court order to reconstruct the Morris homicide file and make it available to the
public.
Morris, 47, was a transgender woman found with a head injury shortly after
receiving a courtesy ride from Philadelphia police on December 22, 2002. She
died two days later.
Police say they have lost the entire homicide file related to her death.
It remains to be seen whether Presenza’s decision will trigger the release of
all six warrants in the Morris case.
Copies of search warrants are supposed to be filed with the court clerk’s office
for tracking purposes. But in the past, some judges have retained search-warrant
information within their own files, especially if a warrant was initially
sealed.
In the Morris case, the First Judicial Court clerk’s office was able to locate
three warrants, which were never sealed by a judge. Those warrants were executed
for surveillance tapes along Walnut Street, near Broad, where police say the
ride took place.
The warrants yielded several hours of tapes, which the police say they’ve
subsequently lost.
However, to locate the other three Morris warrants, the court clerk’s office
needs the name of the judge who issued them.
Those three warrants were issued for transmissions on an enhanced 911 tape, AT&T
wireless cell-phone records and a surveillance tape from a camera at 1632 Walnut
St.
“We’ve been unable to locate those warrants,” said Dominic J. Rossi, deputy
court administrator of the First Judicial District of Pennsylvania. “For those
warrants, we really need the name of the judge and the date the warrant was
issued to be able to locate them.”
Efforts have now shifted to the District Attorney’s Office, which normally
retains search-warrant information and could facilitate the release of the
missing warrants by providing the name of the judge who issued them and the
dates they were issued.
Rossi said he wasn’t in a position to directly ask the DA’s office for
information to help the clerk’s office locate the missing warrants.
Cathie Abookire, a spokesperson for the DA, had no comment on whether her office
would facilitate the release of the Morris search warrants.
The enhanced 911 tape contained transmissions by paramedics on the scene where
Morris was found with a fatal head wound at 16th and Walnut streets.
In order to have preserved those transmissions, police must have specifically
sought them out via an internal memorandum or search warrant. Search warrants
are utilized if there’s a possibility the transmissions will be used as evidence
in a court proceeding.
Advocates for Morris say locating the search warrant for the enhanced 911 tape
would be a key step in determining its chain of possession, whether a copy
currently exists and whether a court seal is blocking its release.
“We simply must get clarity on the whereabouts of this tape and what was said on
the tape,” said Kathleen R. Padilla, a transgender activist.
This week, William M. Johnson, executive director of the Police Advisory
Commission, said the PAC remains committed to uncovering information about the
enhanced 911 tape, along with information about cell-phone conversations between
police who responded to Morris.
“While we’re hoping to see everything that’s relevant within the district
attorney’s file, the search warrants for these records are of particular
interest to the commission,” Johnson told PGN.
He said the PAC has been working with the DA since March 2008 to obtain
comprehensive records in the case so that it can conclude its Morris
investigation - which has ensued for more than five years.
So far, the DA’s office has resisted all attempts by the PAC to obtain
photocopies of key Morris records, but has offered to allow a visual inspection
of some additional records, Johnson said.
Such an inspection would require the signing of a nondisclosure agreement, which
the PAC members have not yet agreed to do, he said. Any nondisclosure agreement
signed by PAC members must include a provision retaining the PAC’s right to seek
release of the requested documents through a court challenge, Johnson added.
He said that even if the PAC members sign a nondisclosure agreement prior to
viewing additional Morris records, it wouldn’t prevent them from talking in
general terms about the documents.
“We could talk publicly about conclusions that we reached after viewing the
documents but we couldn’t disclose the specifics of what each document
contained,” said Johnson.
In lieu of signing the agreement, the commission also could go directly to court
to obtain the desired documents, since it already issued a subpoena to the DA
for those records back in August.
Johnson said there’s no deadline for a decision on signing the nondisclosure
agreement, but the issue will be discussed at the PAC’s next meeting,
tentatively scheduled for 7 p.m. March 11 at 34 S. 11th St., sixth floor.
Timothy Cwiek can be reached at (215) 625-8501 ext. 208.
© 2009 PGN-The Philadelphia Gay News
http://tinyurl.com/apr94h
New court procedural rule may help open Morris records
by Tim Cwiek
02.27.09 - 08:00 am
A new state Supreme Court procedure that makes search warrants available to the
public applies retroactively to the six warrants issued in the Nizah Morris
investigation, a local judge said recently.
In a Jan. 16 letter to PGN, Municipal Court Judge Louis J. Presenza said state
Supreme Court Rule 212 applies to search warrants issued in the Morris case six
years ago, even though the new rule didn’t go into effect until last August.
Presenza said the rule wasn’t meant to be retroactive, but court officials are
applying it retroactively to the Morris case because of a May 2008 Common Pleas
Court order to reconstruct the Morris homicide file and make it available to the
public.
Morris, 47, was a transgender woman found with a head injury shortly after
receiving a courtesy ride from Philadelphia police on December 22, 2002. She
died two days later.
Police say they have lost the entire homicide file related to her death.
It remains to be seen whether Presenza’s decision will trigger the release of
all six warrants in the Morris case.
Copies of search warrants are supposed to be filed with the court clerk’s office
for tracking purposes. But in the past, some judges have retained search-warrant
information within their own files, especially if a warrant was initially
sealed.
In the Morris case, the First Judicial Court clerk’s office was able to locate
three warrants, which were never sealed by a judge. Those warrants were executed
for surveillance tapes along Walnut Street, near Broad, where police say the
ride took place.
The warrants yielded several hours of tapes, which the police say they’ve
subsequently lost.
However, to locate the other three Morris warrants, the court clerk’s office
needs the name of the judge who issued them.
Those three warrants were issued for transmissions on an enhanced 911 tape, AT&T
wireless cell-phone records and a surveillance tape from a camera at 1632 Walnut
St.
“We’ve been unable to locate those warrants,” said Dominic J. Rossi, deputy
court administrator of the First Judicial District of Pennsylvania. “For those
warrants, we really need the name of the judge and the date the warrant was
issued to be able to locate them.”
Efforts have now shifted to the District Attorney’s Office, which normally
retains search-warrant information and could facilitate the release of the
missing warrants by providing the name of the judge who issued them and the
dates they were issued.
Rossi said he wasn’t in a position to directly ask the DA’s office for
information to help the clerk’s office locate the missing warrants.
Cathie Abookire, a spokesperson for the DA, had no comment on whether her office
would facilitate the release of the Morris search warrants.
The enhanced 911 tape contained transmissions by paramedics on the scene where
Morris was found with a fatal head wound at 16th and Walnut streets.
In order to have preserved those transmissions, police must have specifically
sought them out via an internal memorandum or search warrant. Search warrants
are utilized if there’s a possibility the transmissions will be used as evidence
in a court proceeding.
Advocates for Morris say locating the search warrant for the enhanced 911 tape
would be a key step in determining its chain of possession, whether a copy
currently exists and whether a court seal is blocking its release.
“We simply must get clarity on the whereabouts of this tape and what was said on
the tape,” said Kathleen R. Padilla, a transgender activist.
This week, William M. Johnson, executive director of the Police Advisory
Commission, said the PAC remains committed to uncovering information about the
enhanced 911 tape, along with information about cell-phone conversations between
police who responded to Morris.
“While we’re hoping to see everything that’s relevant within the district
attorney’s file, the search warrants for these records are of particular
interest to the commission,” Johnson told PGN.
He said the PAC has been working with the DA since March 2008 to obtain
comprehensive records in the case so that it can conclude its Morris
investigation - which has ensued for more than five years.
So far, the DA’s office has resisted all attempts by the PAC to obtain
photocopies of key Morris records, but has offered to allow a visual inspection
of some additional records, Johnson said.
Such an inspection would require the signing of a nondisclosure agreement, which
the PAC members have not yet agreed to do, he said. Any nondisclosure agreement
signed by PAC members must include a provision retaining the PAC’s right to seek
release of the requested documents through a court challenge, Johnson added.
He said that even if the PAC members sign a nondisclosure agreement prior to
viewing additional Morris records, it wouldn’t prevent them from talking in
general terms about the documents.
“We could talk publicly about conclusions that we reached after viewing the
documents but we couldn’t disclose the specifics of what each document
contained,” said Johnson.
In lieu of signing the agreement, the commission also could go directly to court
to obtain the desired documents, since it already issued a subpoena to the DA
for those records back in August.
Johnson said there’s no deadline for a decision on signing the nondisclosure
agreement, but the issue will be discussed at the PAC’s next meeting,
tentatively scheduled for 7 p.m. March 11 at 34 S. 11th St., sixth floor.
Timothy Cwiek can be reached at (215) 625-8501 ext. 208.
© 2009 PGN-The Philadelphia Gay News
http://tinyurl.com/apr94h