Early in the murder trial of Christopher Deedy, state Circuit Judge Karen Ahn rejected news reporters’ request that her bench conferences with attorneys be open to the public. Ahn continued to ignore the right of the media and the public to hear court discussions in the absence of the jury.

Such conduct erodes trust in the judicial system, and Chief Justice Mark Recktenwald should assertively remind Ahn and other judges that trials must be open to the public.

Through the five-week trial, Ahn held secret discussions with the prosecutor and defense attorneys from its beginning. The high-profile trial ended Monday with a hung jury, unable to reach a unanimous verdict against Deedy, a U.S. State Department special agent from Virginia charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of Kollin Elderts of Kailua on Nov. 5, 2011, at a Wakiki McDonald’s restaurant.

Months prior to the trial, Ahn had sealed videos and documents filed by Deedy’s attorneys, rejecting opposition to the sealing by the Star-Advertiser and other media. Such evidence is routine and open to the public prior to trials, but Ahn kept it secret to avoid tainting prospective jurors and witnesses. Normally, potential jurors prejudiced by pre-trial publicity are discovered in pre-trial questioning and are excused from the courtroom. It’s not a problem, even in highly reported cases.

Jeffrey Portnoy, representing media, called the judge’s pre-trial concealment of potential evidence "a very bad precedent," and Ahn’s secret trial and post-trial conferences with attorneys "a disregard for the public’s right to witness courtroom proceedings." He’s right.

The Star-Advertiser and television stations sent Ahn an email in July during the trial asking that she consider their concerns over bench conferences held without a jury present. After all, those conferences were official proceedings transcribed by the court reporter and should be held in open court — but Ahn continued to ignore the public’s right to know.

Bench conferences are allowed to prevent disputed legal arguments from a jury. Most of those discussions are normally requested by attorneys and, if no jury is present and reporters object to the secrecy, the judge tells the lawyers to remain at their seats.

Ahn’s disdain for the public reached its height on the final day of the Deedy trial Monday, after she announced that the jury had sent a note saying it was deadlocked. With the jury not in the courtroom, Deedy attorney Brook Hart told Ahn that he was not ready to accept a hung jury, and Ahn called the lawyers to her bench for a secret discussion that lasted about 20 minutes. The judge then emptied the courtroom, including the media and family and friends of Deedy and Elderts; when she reopened court again, she polled jurors then declared the mistrial.

Portnoy points out that the U.S. Supreme Court and the state Supreme Court in various cases have ruled that public court proceedings can be closed only after the media is given a chance to object to the closure. Those closings are rare, such as discussion of a defendant’s willingness to gather evidence against a cohort, by name, for law enforcement as part of a plea agreement.

In Ahn’s courtroom, concealment of information from the public has become habitual. But that cannot be deemed acceptable — not by a justice system that should be as open as possible to retain its integrity and the trust of its citizens.