Colorado judge denies victims access to Aurora theater rampage documents
Police say James Holmes killed 12 people during a shooting at a movie theater in Colorado.
October 31st, 2012
02:49 AM ET

Colorado judge denies victims access to Aurora theater rampage documents

A judge  has said no to a motion that would have allowed victims of the Aurora theater shooting to look at sealed court documents.

James Holmes is accused of opening fire July 20 in Aurora during a midnight premiere of the latest Batman movie, "The Dark Knight Rises." The rampage left 12 people dead and 58 injured.

Victims were seeking access to court documents and 911 calls.

Releasing the information would "jeopardize defendant’s right to a fair trial," a judge in the case said Tuesday.

Post by:
Filed under: Crime • Justice • U.S.
soundoff (148 Responses)
  1. Aaron

    How? This information is simply a transcript of what occurred. How exactly would factual information "jeopardize [the] defendant’s right to a fair trial?"

    It seems as though the more people you kill, the more perks you receive from the legal system.

    October 31, 2012 at 1:37 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Gildersleeves

    This man must accept what he has done and then request the fitting penalty. Were I he, I'd request death. I'm not too worried about the color of his hair as long as he gets to be dead. Obviously, he's not strong enough to personally request the death penalty, so we must be strong enough to show him it's the right thing to do, so that others may not follow in his footsteps.

    October 31, 2012 at 1:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ben

      Gildersleeves said:
      (we should give him the death penalty),"... so that others may not follow in his footsteps."

      Yeah, because people who commit these kinds of acts are known for there rational thinking. They will just sit on there hands and be a good citizen because we put someone to death.

      October 31, 2012 at 2:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • gager

      Putting someone to death for this heinous crime will not deter others. Putting this person to death gives a person a sense of justice which is more important. The survivors must experience justice so that we may go on living.

      November 1, 2012 at 5:44 am | Report abuse |
    • Jon Morrison

      I don't care if it deters others, nothing will. SO we must kill this idiot!

      November 1, 2012 at 7:17 am | Report abuse |
    • dconklin58

      Gager: "Putting someone to death for this heinous crime will not deter others."

      You can't prove that.

      November 1, 2012 at 10:34 am | Report abuse |
    • Rogerr

      Ben...the US penal system's primary goal is to rehabilitate criminals to re-enter society as law abiding citizens. This guy, will obviously go to either an asylum or a prison without the possiblity of parole. So he will remain a plight on our already overcrowded prison systems for the duration of his life; or we execute him. And judging by the premeditation this guy went through to commit this crime and booby trap his apartment for police and fire fighters...I think we would all feel better if we just lethally injected him and stopped acting like a bunch of ultra liberal pansies.

      November 1, 2012 at 11:48 am | Report abuse |
    • Sherry

      He deserves to die for what he's done. His victims and their families have changed forever. He does not have the right to live, nor do I as a tax payer want to pay for him to be a "resident" in a prision after what he's done. Regardless of what his issues are, he chose to irrevocably change the lives of innocent people. He has no worth any longer, not even as a human.

      November 1, 2012 at 8:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • vingtsunguy

      If your argument had any merit, serial killers would not be known to migrate towards states that still have the death penalty.

      November 1, 2012 at 9:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • Richard E Davis

      What about the victims rights to due process? Why are defendants rights considered above those of the victims? Evidence is evidence, right?

      November 11, 2012 at 7:56 am | Report abuse |
    • bobNC

      Ben, maybe not. However, he should get what he gave a death sentence.

      November 13, 2012 at 12:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • Pamela

      When are you going to get his stupid face off the articule- It is pass time and I am sick of looking at his goofy self everytime I get on this page!!!!!!!!!

      November 15, 2012 at 10:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • paul321

      If he is granted the death penalty then his suffering is ended. Far better to lock him up till he dies a natural death.

      November 16, 2012 at 10:24 am | Report abuse |
  3. qwerty

    guess who's paying for his legal defense ... the American taxpayers of course!

    October 31, 2012 at 2:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hugh Jass

      He's an American citizen, and he lives in the land where all men are kings. He has the same rights as you and I, and although YOU may not want those rights, I do. Really, how do you not know this? Raised in a cave?

      October 31, 2012 at 3:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bill

      The right to legal defense extends to every American citizen. It is an ideal our country was founded upon.

      November 1, 2012 at 8:13 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Huckster

    The only reason the victims want this info is to gain more settlement money. Greedy little suckers aren't they?

    October 31, 2012 at 2:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • K-Netics

      It's the American way. 🙂

      October 31, 2012 at 3:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hugh Jass

      They probably owe thousands in medical bills. It cost my insurance sixty thousand when I had a heart attack. I doubt they have much choice about trying to get some financial compensation . . .

      October 31, 2012 at 3:26 pm | Report abuse |
  5. DD

    Probably looking to start the liable suit early. Most likely the university, theater and so on will be sought for deep-pocket compensation.

    October 31, 2012 at 2:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jade

      That's truly sad.

      Americans seem to expect that they're taken care of - but not inconvenienced. Airport security, anyone? People complain about that, but yet if someone got through and hurt them or someone they'd love, they'd sue the airport and gov't for not doing enough.

      This was a sad event that happened. But I fail to see how most places, especially just a random movie theater, has the budget to install any security measures that would have stopped this from happening. Instead, people would complain that they've had to show up at the theater an hour early to get through its security.

      October 31, 2012 at 2:40 pm | Report abuse |
  6. deesadvocate

    There is evil and then there is mental illness, and then there's criminally insane. I have no idea which one applies in this case. Only through the legal process will the truth, or close to the truth, will be known. Certainly, if mental illness is indeed the cause of his actions, then he must receive proper care as he cannot be responsible for his actions if he does not have normal cerebral functions. If the courts find him criminally insane, then he should be locked up for life. And if he's just pure evil, then he will face the full force of the law. Personally, the death penalty is too easy a way out.

    October 31, 2012 at 2:40 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Justice should be faster

    The trouble with our justice system is it drags out most cases involving the death penalty.Look at how long it took to execute Timothy McVeigh and then look at how long it takes to execute others in this country. They execute people fast when it suits the Govt..Most executions are strung out over a twenty year period nowadays. WHY?

    October 31, 2012 at 2:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      McVeigh wanted no appeals, and he was executed fairly quickly.
      Gacy, on the other hand...

      October 31, 2012 at 7:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • rray

      Mcveigh was executed so fast because the govt did'nt want him around. He was active duty special forces.

      November 3, 2012 at 6:29 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Could of been someonelse

    Hooray for the judge! We don't know for sure whom it was.

    So James is innocent until proven guilty.

    October 31, 2012 at 3:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • Annoyed

      what? he admitted he did it . . . he is only pleading innocent for insanity reasons not because he didnt do it. please do more research on articles before you comment on them . . . it just makes you sound ill-informed. I'm sad for you right now

      October 31, 2012 at 5:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • Donovan

      @Annoyed The very basis of our legal system is that you are innocent untill you are proven (or plea) guilty. Since neither applies to this man he is still legally innocent

      October 31, 2012 at 8:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Annoyed

      I am aware of that. The comment made by Could have been someone else that I was replying to was that it

      1. we dont know who did it
      2. it could have been someone else

      Clearly I am aware of the workings of our legal system because I replied with the appropriate plea and defense case. I am not arguing the fact that he could be found innocent and should not be considered guilty. . . but on an insanity defense, not because he we dont know for sure he did it or it could have been someone else. I was arging with the fact that Could have been someone else suggested that we do not know who commited this crime. I also think you should read more before you post a reply because you missed the clearly stated basis of my argument. The man admitted to the crime, but plead innocent on an insanity basis. The case will not be whether he was the party who commited it, it will be whether he was mentally stable at the time. Your point is true in basis but it has zero to do with the argument I put forth against could have been someone else's argument.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:08 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Hugh Jass

    It's an open-and-shut case. Get him tried and sentenced so we can release the files. Are you REALLY going to try to pleas innocent? Hurry up and die.

    October 31, 2012 at 3:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • alumette

      They will of course go for the insanity defense and obviously he is insane but that reality should not allow him to ever be free. He may escape the death penalty but he will rot in jail.

      November 3, 2012 at 12:55 am | Report abuse |
  10. no

    My heart bleeds for the violent rampaging psycho and his poor trampled rights.

    October 31, 2012 at 6:39 pm | Report abuse |
  11. Cindy

    Where is my post ?

    October 31, 2012 at 8:24 pm | Report abuse |
  12. dude

    Iraq Syria Afghanistan .

    100 fold the amount in one day please help them too

    November 1, 2012 at 12:56 am | Report abuse |
  13. alumette

    A bit too late to be concerned about the fair trial of this mass murderer. What are the victims and their families thinking about that ? I can only imagine. In a perfect world, such individual would have been stopped before he got to injure one single person. We are far from a perfect world. We allow murderers to go free so they may kill again, over and over. Is that fair or is our justice system a joke ?

    November 3, 2012 at 12:52 am | Report abuse |
  14. smako

    When the trial is over they can have access, nobody ever gets full disclosure before a trial is over. The defense is going to drag their feet because this geek is going to be in a rubber room for the next 20 years anyway. Kill him, don't kill him. He will never breathe our air again.

    November 4, 2012 at 12:38 pm | Report abuse |
  15. Richard E Davis

    What about the victims rights to due process? How do facts change by making them available to the victims?

    November 11, 2012 at 7:58 am | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4