US v. Scruggs: Anonymous Jury Request Granted

US District Judge Neal Biggers on Thursday granted the government’s request for an anonymous jury in US v. Scruggs. He ruled that three elements existed which could justify granting the motion, and in particular whether there has been a past attempt by the defendant to interfere with the judicial process:

In this case, there is evidence before the court in sworn testimony in open court, uncontradicted at the time, of past attempts on the part of the defendants herein to interfere with the judicial process. Indeed, that is the charge involved in this case, and, in addition, the court has heard sworn testimony that an attempt at interference with the judicial process also has taken place in another court by some of the defendants herein. The court is not judging whether this evidence is true; however, there is sworn testimony, unrebutted at this point, sufficient to find at this time, based on more than “mere allegations and inferences,” that this element is applicable here for the purpose of ruling on this motion.

US v Scruggs Anonymous Jury Granted

In a related development, the government responded to Zach Scruggs’ separate dismissal motion (earlier), calling it gratuitously inflammatory and that it appearing “to be designed to influence the jury pool.” Response to Zach Scruggs Motion to Dismiss