Judge fights courtroom intimidation

A top state judge yesterday banned anyone from entering a courthouse wearing clothing that bears the phrase ''Stop Snitching," in a crackdown on the latest forms of witness intimidation in criminal cases.

Robert A. Mulligan, chief justice for administration and management, also imposed strict limits on the use of cellphones in courthouses, citing several recent cases in which spectators pointed mobile-phone cameras at witnesses, jurors, or law-enforcement officials. The incidents included a gang-related conspiracy trial in Salem last spring.

''There are some people coming to courthouses, a very small fraction of people, who come there to chill individuals from participating in the process," Mulligan said in an interview. ''This problem is not an overwhelming concern, but it's something we have to be cognizant of and sensitive to."

The policy, which took effect immediately, was announced after Boston reported 75 homicides last year, its highest total in a decade. Police said they have been unable to make arrests in more than 70 percent of the slayings partly because of an increasingly fierce code of silence on the streets. And, they said, street gangs have sought to enforce the code by intimidating witnesses at courthouses.

Carol Rose, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, said the prohibition on attire would probably pass constitutional muster because the judiciary has broad authority to keep courts safe.

Nonetheless, she criticized the blanket ban at the state's 113 courthouses, saying that judges already have the discretion to eject spectators who are disrupting trials or intimidating participants.

''I think targeting one specific message is an ineffectual approach to this problem because people can change their message," she said. ''This strikes me more as show than as a practical policy that's going to make any difference."

At least one judge has already ejected courtroom spectators for wearing ''Stop Snitching" T-shirts. Suffolk Superior Court Judge Margaret R. Hinkle took that step at the December 2004 trial of two alleged gang members accused of gunning down a 10-year-old girl in a botched Boston drive-by shooting.

Last month, Mayor Thomas M. Menino launched a campaign to discourage merchants in Boston from selling ''Stop Snitching" clothing. Lawyers for the ACLU immediately urged the mayor and his police commissioner, Kathleen M. O'Toole, to abandon the effort, saying it violated the First Amendment right to free speech.

After meeting with Menino and Boston Municipal Court Chief Justice Charles R. Johnson a few weeks ago, Mulligan addressed the issue. His guidelines say that anyone wearing such clothes will be barred from courthouses and that anyone found wearing them inside will be ejected.

Mulligan also took aim at increasingly popular cellphones that come equipped with still or video cameras. No one will be allowed to operate the camera feature inside courthouses. Mulligan said in the interview that he was motivated partly by an incident in an Essex County courthouse.

During a gang-related trial in Salem Superior Court last spring, several friends of the defendant, Andy Gonzalez, were seen with cellphone cameras photographing a prosecutor, a police investigator, and a witness who was testifying, said Steve O'Connell, spokesman for Essex District Attorney Jonathan W. Blodgett. The next day, court officers prohibited anyone from entering the courtroom with a cellphone that had a camera. Gonzalez was acquitted of conspiracy to commit murder.

Two veteran court officers at Suffolk County Superior Court also mentioned several incidents recently in which officers spotted spectators pointing cellphone cameras at witnesses or jurors.

''We made a big deal of it," one officer said of an incident in which he ejected a camera-toting female spectator who was related to a defendant. ''She never came back."

Both officers spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to speak for attribution.

Menino applauded the new policy and said Mulligan is also considering setting up rooms in courthouses where witnesses can go to avoid running into supporters of defendants.

Prosecutors also were pleased. Geline Williams, executive director of the Massachusetts District Attorneys Association, said the guidelines struck her as a sensible approach to witness intimidation.

Plymouth District Attorney Timothy J. Cruz said the policy dovetailed with sweeping new state legislation that prosecutors are supporting on Beacon Hill to combat intimidation. He said the objectionable clothing ''has no purpose in a courthouse, if you ask me, other than a bad purpose."

However, a lawyer who specializes in civil liberties cases, disagreed. Harvey A. Silverglate said the phrase could legitimately be considered a political statement by people, including himself, who believe that evidence provided by informants is often unreliable and leads to wrongful convictions.

''The informant system, as it has evolved in Boston and all over the country, has produced such a large number of false convictions that it's a perfectly appropriate political point of view to say that the snitch system has to be reformed or abolished," he said. He added that he believed the ban on the clothes was unconstitutional.

But Mulligan seemed unruffled. ''This is a very narrowly tailored policy that doesn't impose upon the First Amendment rights of individuals," he said. ''I'm confident, if that were challenged, that we would prevail."

Jonathan Saltzman can be reached at jsaltzman@globe.com.