WILMINGTON — The attorney for two of three Wilmington police officers fired last month for making racist comments is asking for a Superior Court Judge to delay a hearing which will decide whether or not to release recordings of those officers. The attorney is also asking to hold that hearing in-person to present evidence and a witness.
In a motion submitted to the court this week, attorney J. Michael McGuinness argued that releasing the recordings could lead to ‘criminal violence’ against the officers and in Wilmington in general. McGuinness also argued that a virtual hearing would be difficult because he does not have the appropriate equipment (i.e. a computer with camera and microphone) to reliably ensure his clients’ participation. (You can find the complete motion at the end of this article.)
Superior Court Judge Josh Willey is currently scheduled to hold a virtual hearing on Wednesday morning (Judge G. Frank Jones was initially slated to handle the hearing, but recused himself). The hearing will hear arguments from the City of Wilmington, asking to release the recordings of three police officers: Kevin Piner, Jesse Moore II, and James Brian Gilmore.
Two of those officers — Piner and Moore are opposing the release of those recordings through their attorney, McGuinness (who continues to contend that the officers resigned and were not, as WPD claimed, fired). The third officer, Gilmore, has filed for an appeal of his termination through the city’s civil service commission. Through his attorney, Barry Henline, Gilmore has supported the release of the recordings — although Henline has indicated that Gilmore will not participate in the hearing.
In his motion, McGuinness asked the court to move the hearing from the WebEx remote format to a ‘live in-person hearing’ and to grant Piner and Moore a ‘brief continuance.’
The motion claims that “Wilmington experienced chaos including attempts to incite riots, property damage, assaults on law enforcement officers and riot like conditions. Protests that often started peacefully turned violent and resulted in violence, vandalism, and destruction. Former Officers Piner and Moore have been subjected to death threats; their children and families have been harassed.”
The motion then argues that that “[i]f the police recording is made public, there is an extraordinary likelihood that more criminal violence will resume in Wilmington and against [Piner and Moore]” and that “Therefore, the hearing on this matter is of utmost importance, not just to [Piner and Moore] but to the entire Wilmington community. The public safety is directly at risk.”
The motion also expresses ‘concerns’ about the “overall feasibility of this hearing without at least a limited in-person segment as Respondents have a witness and exhibits. The feasibility of handling the entire hearing electronically appears very, very difficult.”
The motion notes that McGuinness “does not have an office computer system with either a camera, video or audio capability” and that, while he does have a cell phone, he “does not want to risk having electronic and or other failure jeopardize his clients’ ability to be heard.”
McGuinness suggested that participants could attend a live in-person hearing wearing gloves and masks and remaining twelve feet apart.
Send comments and tips to Benjamin Schachtman at ben@localdailymedia.com, @pcdben on Twitter, and (910) 538-2001.
Piner, Moore – Petition Hearing Motion for in Person Hearing by Ben Schachtman on Scribd
