News and Music Discovery
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations

Judge Jameson Responds to Allegations Involving Marshall Shooter Case

MATT MARKGRAF, WKMS

Circuit Court Judge Jamie Jameson denies any misconduct in the Marshall County High School shooter case. That’s according to responses filed by his office to the Kentucky Court of Appeals toa writ filed by lawyers representing Paxton Media Group.

The writ alleges that Jameson improperly interfered with the prosecution of accused shooter 15-year-old Gabe Parker and challenges whether the closed arraignment on February 16 should have been public (and that a video of the hearing should be released) since Parker is being tried as an adult. 

In the response, Jameson said the claims brought against him are “grounded in speculation.” He said PMG is labeling a ‘difference of legal opinion’ as “serious misconduct.”

Jameson's response argues that the writ lacks evidence and is instead "grounded considerably on mere nonspecific speculation from an unidentified "source" or "sources" who leaked what he said are confidential court documents. His response argued, too, that the writ does not provide enough proof to show "immediate irreparable harm." Jameson called the "bits" of "information" in the writ alleging misconduct as being 'spun' into "false accusations."

Specifically, responding to his alleged acquaintance with the accused shooter's mother, Jameson wrote that he has no personal relationship with her, but rather merely knows her as a reporter who works at a local media outlet.

The response noted that the Kentucky statute brought into question states that records of juveniles in matters like this are confidential until "after the child has been indicted and arraigned," with an emphasis on the words 'after' and 'and.' It also states that PMG was informed that post-arraignment hearings would be public, which PMG had requested in the writ. The response goes on to state that the 'Petitioners' have not been barred from any post-arraignment proceedings. PMG's lawyers claim of a 'secret hearing' that followed the arraignment - more on that below.

Jameson's response outlined events that transpired soon after the shooting:

Jameson wrote an outline of what transpired in the hours after the shooting incident. This is information is also described in an order that was dated on January 24 and signed on January 25 and had been sealed, though is included in the response document as "Exhibit 1."

According to the 'Findings of Fact,' on January 23, at 10:15 a.m. (around two hours after the time of the shooting), attorney Bethany Willcutt with the Kentucky Department of Public Advocacy arrived at the chambers of Judge Jameson and informed staff that she intended to move the Court to appoint a DPA to represent the juvenile being held and questioned at the Marshall County Detention Center. According to the response, she had said he was being questioned by law enforcement, in custody, about his potential involvement in the shooting.

The Commonwealth Attorney was present and working on a different matter at the time and was asked to participate in any conference with Willcutt and he agreed. She then expressed that the mother was concerned that her child was being interrogated without an attorney present and noted that the mother had asked her to represent the child in the ongoing interrogation. Willcutt said her request to see or counsel the child was denied at the detention facility by a detective because she was an employee of the DPA and had not been appointed to represent the child. She then made a motion for DPA to be appointed as the juvenile's mother would not have financial means to afford an attorney in a case of this nature. The Commonwealth's Attorney did not object, according to the response.

The response said both attorneys confirmed to Jameson that no action or proceeding had yet been filed with the Marshall County Circuit Clerk against the juvenile, which means that any jurisdiction to appoint counsel was in the court of 'general jurisdiction' - the circuit court.

By 10:25 a.m., the Court informed investigators that the DPA had been appointed to represent the juvenile. "No order or recommendation of any kind was given by the Respondent (Jameson) that any interrogation be ceased nor that any other action be taken, or not taken." This point appears to contradict claims in the writ that Jameson had tried to stop the detective's interview. The response also notes that law enforcement had informed Jameson at 10:22 a.m. that the child had already ended the interrogation by requesting an attorney.

An official proceeding was then initiated in a district court, whereby they had exclusive jurisdiction over the offense due to the matter involving a juvenile. That court ruled to transfer the matter to the Marshall County grand jury, who then indicted the juvenile on February 13, meaning he will be tried as an adult on charges of murder and assault.

Jameson wrote that he received an email from the defense counsel prior to the arraignment on February 16 that they intended to challenge the competency of the defendant at his arraignment appearance. During the arraignment, the defense counsel, however, "could provide no reasonable grounds for a competency challenge." Had reasonable grounds existed, the response stated, Jameson would have been required to postpone "all proceedings until the issue of incapacity" was determined. This means that juvenile records would have remained confidential. "If the media and public were permitted to be at the arraignment and the juvenile's capacity was successfully challenged, there would have been no way for Respondent to 'un ring the bell' of the disclosure of records."

As for the 'conference call' on February 19, the response stated that such 'informal communications' between a court and parties are "often necessary for the expeditious adjudication of legal matters." During this meeting, the defense questioned the accused shooter's due process and asked documents remain confidential until a motion was filed and determined. This is the 'Agreed Order' that was released after the call. The defense has until March 8 to file and the prosecution has until March 12 to respond.

Jameson said he intends to issue a written opinion on the issue no later than mid-March. Jameson said until that time, "all records need remain confidential." Responding to Paxton Media Group's calls for recusal, Jameson wrote that such a call would need to come from "either the defendant or the prosecution, not the media" and that such a motion would need to be justified with a burden of proof. Regarding any relationship with the mother, Jameson wrote that simply knowing who a person is, does not create a circumstance where one could not preside over the case.

The only "harm," the response stated (responding to the writ that cites irreparable harm), is "Petitioners (PMG) having to wait up to a few weeks for the records they seek to be released." He noted in "Requested Relief" that Judges shall "not be swayed by public clamor or fear of criticism." 

Paxton Media Group's Attorneys React to the Response:

Attorney Jon Fleischaker is representing Paxton Media Group. He said Jameson’s response confirmed the claims in their petition. “There is no question that he had hearings closed to the public - secret hearings. There’s no question he issued secret orders in Circuit Court, there is no question that this was in Circuit Court, not juvenile court. So I think in essence, he confirmed everything that we had said," Fleischaker said.

Mike Abate is also part of Paxton's legal team."The judge has entered an order, a supposedly agreed order, sealing the entire case file, which prohibits anyone in the public, including the victims and the family members from understanding the proceedings that have taken place thus far in circuit court or accessing any of the records. It is far, far beyond what is even arguably necessary to safeguard the limited kinds of information in a juvenile court file that can sometimes be preserved or sometimes be kept confidential after a case is transferred to a circuit court for trial as an adult," he said. 

"Each day that the public is denied the right to access the court file is a constitutional violation," Abate added. He said, for now, they are awaiting an order from the Court of Appeals that will either set an argument in the case or resolve their petition. 

Matt Markgraf joined the WKMS team as a student in January 2007. He's served in a variety of roles over the years: as News Director March 2016-September 2019 and previously as the New Media & Promotions Coordinator beginning in 2011. Prior to that, he was a graduate and undergraduate assistant. He is currently the host of the international music show Imported on Sunday nights at 10 p.m.
Taylor is a recent Murray State University graduate where she studied journalism and history. When she's not reporting for WKMS, she enjoys creative writing and traveling. She loves writing stories that involve diversity, local culture and history, nature and recreation, art and music, and national or local politics. If you have a news tip or idea, shoot her an email at tinman1@murraystate.edu!
Related Content