Trial dates set for some Roebling protestors

Trial and pre-trial dates have been set for some of the people arrested during a chaotic encounter with several police forces on the Roebling Bridge on July 17.

Two hearings related to the encounter occurred in Kenton County District Court this week, on Wednesday and Thursday, respectively. Judge Kenneth Easterling oversaw both hearings.

These hearings were the first time the people arrested had reappeared in court since a preliminary hearing on July 23. They also occurred in the same week that a handful of Covington residents spoke at a City Commission meeting against the police’s actions on the bridge.

Fifteen people were arrested and charged with felony rioting after the encounter on the bridge, video footage of which quickly circulated among news media and on social media.

Videos showed police making arrests, deploying tasers and other weapons and arresting Cincinnati CityBeat Investigative Reporter Madeline Fening. Other video footage shows an officer, Zachary Stayton, repeatedly punching protestor Brandon Hill in the head while other officers hold him down.

Seven people received plea deals at the July 23 hearing, wherein they pleaded guilty to a single, lower charge in exchange for the dismissal of their other charges, including those for rioting. The court granted them time served on their charges but did not waive their court costs.

Four others, including Hill, had the probable cause for their rioting charges upheld and sent to a grand jury, which will determine if there is enough evidence for their cases to stand trial.

The remaining four people, including Fening and another CityBeat journalist, Lucas Griffith, had their rioting charges dismissed but lower misdemeanor charges upheld. Thursday’s hearing focused on the misdemeanors, which included charges like obstructing a highway and failure to disperse, among others.

The first hearing on Wednesday afternoon was related to one protestor, Ohio resident Logan Imber, whose rioting charge was upheld on July 23. That hearing focused on a motion made on July 20 by Imber’s attorney, Kenton County’s Assistant Public Advocate Brian Davis, asking the court to preserve evidence related to the bridge encounter: videos, analyses, forensic reports and other forms of available evidence. Fening and Griffith’s attorneys, Benjamin Pugh and William Sharp, made similar motions.

Davis did not attend Wednesday’s hearing. Instead, Tatum Goetz-Isaacs, the public advocate’s office’s head attorney, represented Imber in the courtroom.

Goetz-Isaacs could not speak to Davis’ reasoning for making the motion, but both Kenton County Commonwealth’s Attorney Rob Sanders and Easterling thought the motion was overly broad and unnecessary.

Easterling commented that if Davis wanted to submit a motion for specific information or evidence, he might consider it, but found the blanket request needless and denied it.

Easterling reacted similarly on Thursday, pointing out that Kentucky had open-file evidence discovery. Prosecutor Drew Harris, meanwhile, laid out the argument against the motion for evidence preservation.

“I think that is, frankly, a silly motion,” said Harris. “The Commonwealth is under a continuing Constitutional duty to these defendants to preserve the evidence. I don’t think a court order is necessary to ensure these individuals’ Constitutional rights.”

Sharp, Easterling and Harris went back and forth on whether or not the motion to preserve evidence was warranted.

“My client is entitled to the evidence in the case,” Sharp said during Griffith’s hearing.

“He is,” Easterling said.

Sharp responded by saying that his clients were due protection against “inadvertent destruction or negligent destruction, which happens,” Sharp said. “Maybe the court’s not seeing it in its experience; I’ve seen it in mine. Officers lose things, they destroy tapes, they throw things away, they throw notes away, they misplace investigative letters. It happens. It’s not unreasonable for my clients to move to preserve evidence.”

“I repeat what I said in Miss Fennings’s case, the Commonwealth understands its Constitutional obligations to provide exculpatory evidence, free material and the like, and preserve evidence pursuant to the criminal rules, and we are going to continue to do that,” Harris said.

“Maybe there are prosecutors around the state that hide stuff,” Easterling said. “I don’t know; I don’t think so, you know? But they’re going to preserve–they’re not going to destroy anything.”

Sharp asked if the court was granting or denying the motion, and Easterling said it was granting it for both reporters. The attorneys also had made motions to reduce the reporters’ bonds, but Easterling denied these. Easterling set pretrial dates for both Fening and Griffith for Sept. 4 and Sept. 25 to allow the attorneys time to subpoena. Fening’s trial date was set for Sept. 30, and Griffith’s trial date was set for Oct. 2.

Two other people who’d been arrested, Kean Babock and Suzanne Bratt, also had hearings on Thursday. Their hearings were shorter and didn’t contain extended exchanges between the attorneys and the judge. Both of their pretrial dates were set for Oct. 16.

An internal affairs investigation into the actions of the Covington police officers who made the arrests is ongoing. The City plans to hold a public meeting to share the results of the investigation once it’s completed.