Recently in Douglas Bradford Category

We often hear lawyers tell reporters they don't want to "try the case in the press" as a reason for not speaking to them. I've never really been sure what that means since lawyers are supposed to be adept at screening jurors for potential bias and triers of the fact are precluded from basing decisions on anything other than what is presented in the courtroom as evidence. Most the time, anyway, the lawyers who are making that claim are the ones who are calling reporters and secretly slipping them tips and documents.

Because, let's be honest, for most attorneys? It's all about the public. The public only knows what's going on in the courtroom because reporters are the only ones who bother to show up and see what's going on. And while attorneys will tell you until they're blue in the face that they are fighting for justice, the truth is, many are really fighting for their next paycheck or accolades from their superiors or high fives from their colleagues. They need reporters to get their names and successes out. We need them to make our stories fair, accurate and balanced. It is a mutually beneficial relationship.

When attorneys stand up in court and tell a judge that their opposition is posturing for the media, it creates a dangerous situation. Judges are vigilante about ensuring the integrity of the judicial process and will do whatever is necessary to protect it from any perceived danger - real or not. Often, the result of this is the issuance of a sealing or gag order from the judge.

Such orders were put in place to keep information out of the public that, if released, would be detrimental to a party. For example, revealing what a witness to a dangerous crime said could jeopardize their safety or releasing trade secrets of a corporation would give competitors an unfair advantage. They are NOT, however, supposed to be used to keep information out of the public eye just because either side doesn't like what that information is.

An attorney for Norma Bradford told Torrance Superior Court Judge Laura Ellison that her client didn't come to court today for her conditional exam because she checked herself into a hospital. Ellison put the exam over until Monday and agreed to hold-off on issuing an arrest warrant for the 87-year-old woman.

We'll have a fuller story later on dailybreeze.com

Previously:

1979 Torrance murder suspect's mom a no-show in court

The 87-year-old mother of Douglas Bradford, an Orange County engineer accused of the 1979 murder of Torrance registered nurse Lynne Knight, was supposed to appear in Torrance Superior Court this morning so the attorneys could question her and save her statements on video.

The District Attorney's A/V squad was all set-up, along with a camera crew from NBC's Dateline, but Mona Norma Bradford did not show.

A woman who may or may not be her attorney (it really wasn't clear) told Judge Laura Ellison that she called Mrs. Bradford's cell phone, heard rustling and whispering, then someone say, 'I'm in the hospital," according to Los Angeles Superior Court Public Information Officer Allan Parachini.

Ellison told her that Mrs. Bradford needed to report to court today, or she will issue a $50,000 warrant for her arrest.

I'm standing by and ready to run back to court if I hear she shows up.

Meanwhile, the NBC crew ran into a bit of trouble because they defied the court's order to not film anyone in the audience. Parachini said he demanded the cameraman to delete the recording, but he seemed to be resisting and trying to find a way around it - like "digitizing" the film to obscure faces. Parachini seemed pretty adamant that the recording was not going to leave the courthouse.

Just came from court where Douglas Gordon Bradford was scheduled to be arraigned for the 1979 strangling death of Lynne Knight. He posted $1.02 million bail, though, and the hearing was postponed until June 18.

Working on a follow up.