Court order prompts lawmakers to delay hearing on Charlotte crime
A state legislative committee has postponed a hearing originally scheduled this week to address crime and public safety in Charlotte. Committee leaders seek “legal clarification” about the “scope of allowed public discussion,” according to a news release Tuesday.
The House Select Committee on Oversight and Reform hearing originally scheduled for Thursday has been pushed back 11 days to Feb. 9.
Committee chairs plan to “file a motion seeking clarification of a federal court order issued earlier this month that limits state lawmakers from publicly disclosing information related to Decarlos Brown, who murdered Iryna Zarutska,” according to the committee news release.
“Clear court guidance is necessary so committee members can thoroughly question Charlotte officials in light of recent tragedies,” the release continued.
US Magistrate Judge David Keesler issued an emergency protective order on Jan. 15 blocking the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department and North Carolina legislators from releasing information from the criminal investigative file connected to Zarutska’s stabbing death last summer on Charlotte’s light rail line.
Defendant Decarlos Dejuan Brown Jr. and US Attorney Russ Ferguson both supported the order.
Brown faces state-level murder charges and a federal charge, “violence against a railroad carrier and mass transportation system resulting in death.” That federal charge makes Brown eligible for the death penalty if convicted.
Keesler had issued an earlier order in the federal case, later upheld by US District Judge Kenneth Bell, that blocked CMPD from releasing law enforcement video and audio recordings to the media.
“[T]he Court notes the earlier Order prohibits the release of any and all recordings relating to the August 22, 2025, events that are the subject of the indictment in this case,” Keesler wrote in his latest four-page order. “To the extent the materials Defendant now seeks to protect are not covered in that, the Court finds good cause to enter another preliminary protective order.”
“The Court determines Defendant has sufficiently shown release of the materials may prejudice his constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial, and may cause other harms including risking the safety of witnesses,” Keesler added. “This preliminary protective order may be subject to reconsideration after any further responses are filed or at a later date if circumstances in this case change.”
Brown filed an emergency motion for a protective order on Jan. 14.
He sought an order “preventing the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department and/or the House Oversight Committee of the North Carolina General Assembly (and its members, staffers, and any other person), from releasing or otherwise disclosing the Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department’s (and the Mecklenburg County District Attorney’s) criminal investigative file related to the death of I.Z. and related to the investigation of DeCarlos Brown, Jr.”
Brown’s lawyers learned on Jan. 14 about a Dec. 19 demand letter state legislators sent to Mecklenburg County District Attorney Spencer Merriweather. The letter sought “emails, messaging, or any other form of correspondence, and all documents, reports, memos, other written materials, or links to such” dealing with the Zarutska case and another Charlotte train stabbing on Dec. 8.
“Mr. Merriweather has determined that the request included ‘the criminal case file related to the defendant’s prosecution,’” Brown’s lawyers wrote. The court filing cited a document filed in state court indicating the DA office’s intent to comply with the legislative request.
“At approximately 4:30 this afternoon, the defense learned that the file may have already been sent by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department to the legislative committee and legislators,” Brown’s Jan. 14 court filing continued.
“This Court has already addressed the dangers of premature release of limited records related to this case in a recent protective order,” Brown’s lawyers wrote. “Given the similar nature and urgency of this situation — that these materials may have already been produced, and given the risk that sensitive, confidential, privileged, inadmissible, and other materials may be soon released to the public — counsel ask for an emergency protective preventing the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, the North Carolina Legislature (including the House Oversight Committee), Representative Jake Johnson, Representative Brenden Jones, Representative Harry Warren, and any other Legislator, staff, volunteer, or any other person from releasing or otherwise disclosing the criminal investigation file related to the death of I.Z. or the investigation of DeCarlos Brown, Jr. to any person or agency absent an order from this Court.”
Ferguson oversees prosecution of the federal case. His office filed a separate document in federal court on Jan. 14 “joining Defendant’s emergency motion for a protective order regarding the disclosure of the criminal investigative file of the Defendant.”
“Regardless of who has the file, the government joins Defendant’s request for a protective order over the CMPD’s criminal investigative file related to DeCarlos Dejuan Brown, Jr.,” assistant US attorneys in Ferguson’s office wrote.
Bell issued a Jan. 9 order blocking the release to television station WSOC of video and audio law enforcement recordings linked to the Zarutska case. The order covered 911 recordings and body-worn camera footage from CMPD. Bell’s order upheld Keesler’s temporary order issued four days earlier.
Brown’s lawyers turned to federal court after a state judge had granted WSOC access to the recordings in Brown’s state-level murder case.
“Brown asserts that public release of the materials will prejudice his constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial, particularly in light of the case’s death penalty-eligible posture and the extensive media coverage it has already generated,” Bell wrote. “Brown further asserts that disclosure of the materials could endanger key witnesses and others depicted in the recordings — either physically or reputationally — and notes that members of his family, the mayor, and others have already received death and other threats related to this matter. The Government likewise expresses concern for witness safety and for preserving the integrity of the federal prosecution.”
“The Court has carefully considered these motions, briefs, and supporting exhibits,” Bell explained. “For the reasons articulated by both Brown and the Government, the Court finds that good cause exists to enter a Rule 16(d) protective order prohibiting the release of the Materials from the August 22, 2025, incident. Therefore, the Court will grant Brown’s Motion for Protective Order as to WSOC-TV, and any other individual or entity other than counsel for the government and Brown (and those individuals working with counsel).”
The lawyer working for Zarutska’s family will have access to the recordings, according to Bell’s order. Brown had consented in a court filing that the Zarutska family should have access to the material.
Ferguson’s office had agreed with Brown’s request to block media access to the recordings.
“The government shares some of Brown’s stated concerns, in particular with regard to witness safety,” wrote federal prosecutors. “The investigation has revealed that individuals in social media have already tried to identify some of the witnesses in the video footage that depicts the murder. That footage was released by the media, and any additional materials that identify witnesses risks their safety and the integrity of this federal prosecution.”
WSOC had criticized Brown’s federal court request as improper.
“Despite labeling his motion as seeking an emergency ‘protective order,’ Defendant Brown actually seeks a federal injunction. Defendant Brown asks this Court to prohibit Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department from producing law enforcement recordings to WSOC-TV to review in compliance with the state court’s recent order,” WSOC- TV’s lawyers wrote. “Further, Defendant Brown seeks to halt WSOC-TV’s current civil lawsuit for the release of these recordings. This motion runs afoul of 28 U.S.C. § 2283, the Anti-Injunction Act, and must be denied.”
“Enjoining WSOC-TV and the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department from proceeding with the state court’s mandate would strike at the sovereignty of the North Carolina court system,” argued attorneys. “The parties were all present at the January 5, 2026 state court hearing and had an opportunity to be heard. The state court considered the arguments of all interested parties and evaluated the factors required under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 132-1.4A(g). At the conclusion of the hearing, the state court ordered the production of the videos to WSOC-TV, pursuant to certain restrictions.”
The TV station also argued that Brown failed to show any concrete harm, noting the recordings are restricted from public release, and that witness safety and fair-trial concerns were already considered by state Superior Court Judge Troy Stafford.
“Throughout his motion, Defendant Brown broadly refers to an alleged irreparable harm to his rights to due process and a fair trial,” wrote WSOC- TV’s lawyers. “However, Defendant fails to explain how the videos being provided to WSOC-TV alone to review, under restriction from being released to any other third party, would result in any perceived deprivations, even if the state court eventually orders release.”
Zarutska’s stabbing death attracted international media attention. It prompted North Carolina legislators to approve Iryna’s Law, a measure Gov. Josh Stein signed on Oct. 3.
“Court order prompts lawmakers to delay hearing on Charlotte crime” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.
