BOSTON (Legal Newsine) - Men accused of frequenting a high-end brothel in Massachusetts must appear at a public hearing, the state’s highest court ruled, saying their right to privacy was trumped by public interest in a case that allegedly involves “government officials, corporate executives” and other powerful figures.
Show cause hearings are normally held behind closed doors because they are intended to allow the accused to challenge misdemeanor criminal charges before they are publicly filed, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court said. But in this case the alleged johns occupy positions of power and the greater risk is the public suspects they get special treatment, the court said.
This case “raised legitimate public concerns about potential favoritism and bias if such hearings were held behind closed doors, and that these concerns outweighed the interests in continued anonymity,” a four-justice panel ruled.
In November 2023 the U.S. Attorney in Massachusetts announced the arrest of three people charged with operating “sophisticated high-end brothels” in the Boston area. The release said an “active and ongoing” investigation suggested the customers included “elected officials, high-tech and pharmaceutical executives, doctors, military officers, government contractors that possess security clearances, professors, attorneys, scientists and accountants.”
Six weeks later the U.S. Attorney said “there would be accountability for the buyers who fuel the commercial sex industry,” and criminal charges had been filed against 28 of the alleged customers.
Various news organizations immediately sought the names of the alleged johns. A clerk-magistrate decided to allow access to the normally closed show cause hearing due to “legitimate public interest.” WBUR-FM also sought the criminal complaints in advance of the hearing, but was denied. The radio station appealed to a district judge, who directed the request to Justice Frank Gaziano of the Supreme Court.
The John Does sought to intervene in the single-justice proceeding, claiming their right to privacy. The justice sent the question back to the clerk-magistrate, who bolstered her decision with a finding it was time to reverse the practice of offering anonymity to sex customers. The magistrate denied prehearing release of criminal applications, however, saying they may contain extraneous and false information that the accused had a right to address at the show cause hearing.
A four-justice panel of the Supreme Court agreed, in a Nov. 14 opinion by Justice Scott L. Kafker. The show cause hearing is a procedure designed to allow people accused of a misdemeanor to challenge the criminal complaint, the court said. Since it was created by statute and is not considered required under the Constitution, it is also not required to be open to the public.
While the public doesn’t have a right to attend show cause hearings, the court went on, they can be open if the underlying incident has already attracted public attention and the accused are powerful figures.
“In these circumstances, the public's interest and concern related not only to the underlying illegal activity at issue, but also to whether the judicial system would afford special treatment to the wealthy or powerful behind the `closed doors of the hearing room,’” the court concluded.
Releasing the charging documents wouldn’t be fair, however, because the accused would be subject to public condemnation with no chance to refute the claims, the court said.
The court rejected due-process arguments the hearings should be closed, saying making them public didn’t threaten the accused with the loss of property or liberty. It isn’t clear “what, besides stigma, is at stake,” the court said.