Oral arguments in a convicted murder’s appeal will be open to the public Wednesday, but attorneys are restricted from delving into the sealed case record, the state Supreme Court affirmed Thursday.
The justices issued a brief order in response to a motion from Seth Mazzaglia’s attorney, who once again last month argued for the right to openly present and not self-sensor his remarks.
But the high court ruled for a third time in favor of state prosecutors and the family of Lizzi Marriott, who was strangled and raped by Mazzaglia in 2012. The Marriott family has fought to keep the 19-year-old’s private sexual history under seal, but Mazzaglia has repeatedly challenged court orders on the issue – both during his trial and on appeal.
A Strafford County Superior Court judge ruled twice that Marriott’s prior sexual history was inadmissible at trial under the state’s rape shield protections. Mazzaglia, who is serving a life prison sentence, maintains the lower court erred and that he deserves a new trial.
Rape shield laws exist in every state and limit or prohibit a defendant’s ability to introduce evidence about a victim’s sexual history to undermine his or her credibility. The law has historically covered all courts until the final disposition of a case.
The state Supreme Court stunned victims’ advocates when it adopted an administrative rule change in January allowing appellate justices to open records previously sealed by the lower courts. The law was applied to the Mazzaglia case retroactively, although the records were not released.
At the request of the attorney general’s office, more than a dozen local and national advocacy groups, and the Marriott family, the court reversed its controversial ruling Sept. 29. In that same order, the justices said oral arguments on Mazzaglia’s direct appeal would be held in open court.
But the phrase “open court” was interpreted differently by the parties in the case.
Mazzaglia’s attorney, Christopher Johnson, said he understood it to mean nothing was off limits – an opinion he expressed in published news reports and that caught the Marriott family’s lawyer off guard.
Attorney Rus Rilee, who had fought for months to keep the teenager’s sexual history out of the public domain, called upon the court to clarify its order. He said he feared “irreputable harm” to the family if the defense disclosed any details from the sealed materials.
The court ruled in the family’s favor Oct. 14, upholding its previous order while also clarifying that attorneys must “act in good faith” by not divulging too much.
Johnson renewed his objection for unrestricted oral arguments Oct. 28, saying he could not otherwise effectively argue issues central to Mazzaglia’s appeal. His motion was denied Thursday.
At different times in the process, Rilee and Johnson had suggested closing the courtroom to allow for open discussion – something the Supreme Court has never done.
Oral arguments are scheduled for Nov. 16 at 9:30 a.m.