Last May, the Missouri public defenders office sought a restraining order against the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, seeking to prevent it from publishing information based on an accused cop killer's mental health evaluation. Attorneys for the public defenders office argued in court today that the restraining order is necessary because the report contains information that they say would be “extremely prejudicial” to the alleged murderer — and contains specific statements he’s made about the crime he'll stand trial for in January.
The mental health report is of Thomas Kinworthy, who is accused of killing officer Tamarris Bohannon in August 2020 in the Tower Grove South neighborhood. An armed Kinworthy allegedly ran into a house on Hartford Avenue, leading the residents to flee. Kinworthy opened fire on Bohannon when he responded to the scene.
Last December, Kinworthy was ordered to take a mental health evaluation as part of a possible defense of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect. That evaluation was conducted by the Missouri Department of Mental Health, and the report was accidentally made public in May. When Post-Dispatch reporter Katie Kull came across it, she called Kingworthy’s public defender Brian Horneyer seeking comment. Horneyer said in court that he responded with "several expletives."
Judge Elizabeth Hogan issued the temporary restraining order blocking the newspaper from publishing anything based on the evaluation — what is considered an extraordinary remedy, since U.S. Supreme Court precedent holds that the government can only order newspapers not to publish under very rare circumstances. Today's hearing was to determine if the temporary order should be extended.
Brendan Kottenstette, the attorney representing the Missouri State Public Defender, sought to make the hearing about the secret document even more secret by closing the courtroom to the public. Post-Dispatch attorney Joseph Martineau opposed that measure, arguing that Kottenstette had only filed the motion to close the hearing 23 minutes before it began, saying, "This is a public courtroom and this is a public proceeding." Judge Hogan ruled the hearing should remain open.
Much of the two-hour hearing was spent with Horneyer himself on the stand articulating why his office felt the evaluation ought to remain out of the public's eyes.
Horneyer said that the evaluation contains biographical information about Kinworthy, as well as his health history and results of psychological tests. That’s all typical for an evaluation of this type, Horneyer testified. But less common is the fact that recordings of Kinworthy’s jailhouse phone calls were also requested by the evaluator and used as part of the basis of the report. Additionally, the report contains details of abuse that Kinworthy endured in his past, as well as specific information about the offenses for which Kinworthy is charged.
Horneyer said that much of the report’s contents would be inadmissible at trial. His concern is that pretrial publication of the report may taint the pool of potential jurors.
Horneyer said that details in the report are “salacious” and that for the jury, it would be “difficult, if not impossible to compartmentalize.”
Kottenstette himself referred to the report as "very long and very detailed."
Martineau argued that “prior restraint” — the legal term for a court blocking what would otherwise be free speech before it even takes place — is “a most extraordinary remedy” only upheld in very rare cases.
Judge Hogan did not issue a ruling today, saying that both sides had 10 days to submit any additional filings in the case.
This story has been updated.
We welcome tips and feedback. Email the author at [email protected]
or follow on Twitter at @RyanWKrull.
Subscribe to Riverfront Times newsletters.
Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed
