A young man accused of sexually assaulting a drunk and unconscious 15-year-old girl could get a break.

But the public may never know the details about why.

Clear Creek County prosecutors have proposed a deal, agreeing to wipe a felony conviction from Joseph P. Carr's record if he stays out of trouble for four years. If Carr decides to take it, the 18-year-old would plead guilty to one charge and receive a deferred sentence. A remaining charge would be dismissed.

The offer followed a rare, closed-door preliminary hearing Jan. 23 during which law enforcement authorities presented their evidence against Carr.

District Judge Russell H. Granger banned a Clear Creek Courant reporter and all members of the public, except Carr's family, from the courtroom and held the hearing in secret.

The judge took the action after a motion by Deputy District Attorney Tamar Wilson to close the proceeding. The case file also has been sealed.

According to the Courant, Carr faces two charges of felony sexual assault for allegedly having sex with a 15-year-old girl, who was intoxicated and unconscious, during a party in May. Carr's defense attorney confirmed the allegation.

Inconsistencies

Mark D. Hurlbert, district attorney for the 5th Judicial District, said the deal was offered after prosecutors found inconsistencies in the alleged victim's statements.

Hurlbert said the closed hearing was necessary because prosecutors were concerned that a potential jury pool would be tainted by the pretrial testimony.

Clear Creek County, Hurlbert argued, is a small jurisdiction and publicity would undoubtedly reach potential jurors. Prosecutors also wanted to protect juvenile witnesses who might testify at the hearing, he said.

Hurlbert said he agrees that operating in a transparent system is vital, but maintained that his prosecutors didn't have much of an option.

"It's very rare we don't have the press and the public in preliminary hearings, but when you have a sexual assault on a juvenile, that can be a potential reason for closing it," he said. "The problem is in a small county we don't particularly want details of high-profile cases to get out because it can cause a jury, in one way or another, to become tainted."

Hurlbert said testimony from the preliminary hearing had nothing to do with the decision to offer a plea because prosecutors learned about the inconsistencies in stories after the hearing.

But Edward Shindell, Carr's defense lawyer, said the testimony by a Clear Creek County sheriff's detective at the preliminary hearing was inconsistent with statements made by witnesses, and he believes he has discovered other conflicting accounts.

The Rocky Mountain News has requested a transcript of the judge's order.

Freedom of press

Journalists have pointed to the First Amendment of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of the press and extends to covering judicial proceedings. Moreover, reporters and the public look at a preliminary hearing as the last stage to monitor the justice system because a large majority of criminal prosecutions in the U.S. are settled without reaching trial.

The hearing is a proceeding in which the case against the defendant is reviewed by a judge, not to determine guilt or innocence, but to decide whether prosecutors have presented enough evidence to justify a trial.

Higher court rulings over the years have invalidated many lower court decisions to close hearings and trials, but not entirely.

"Judges can close hearings and close records but they have to do it within the law," said Lisa Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

Dalglish pointed out, however, that Carr's hearing is a moot point now because it already was held in secret and no one objected.

However, Landmark Community Newspapers, which publishes the Courant, is considering filing a motion to request that the transcripts from the hearing be unsealed.

"The severity of these charges in relation to the drastic plea deal being struck begs for an explanation," said Adrienne Anderson, the Courant editor. "And just because Clear Creek is a small county doesn't mean they should be exempt from public oversight."

Unless he decides to take the case to trial, Carr is expected to enter a guilty plea under the proposed deal at a March 28 hearing. If he accepts the terms, then gets into additional trouble, Carr could wind up before the judge again facing a stiff penalty.

Prosecutors say the alleged victim has agreed to the offer.

gutierrezh@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5204

Back to Top