IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY

STATE OF GEORGIA

STATE OF GEORGIA
Indictment No.
v. 22SC183572

JEFFERY WILLIAMS, et al. Chief Judge Ural Glanville

[PROPOSED] ORDER ON STATE’S MOTION FOR LIMITATION OF RECORDING

On January 19, 2024, the State of Georgia filed a motion requesting the imposition of

limitations on the media’s authorization to record testifying witnesses during the pendency of the

trial under U.S.C.R. 22 (“Rule 22”) and O.C.G.A. § 15-1-10.1. Upon review of the motion,

applicable law, and the record in this case, including prior filings by media intervenors on

October 12, 2023 and December 14, 2022 (“Media Intervenors”), the Court hereby GRANTS IN

PART and DENIES IN PART the State of Georgia’s motion and ORDERS as follows:

1. To address security concerns expressed by certain trial witnesses in this case, counsel for

the State, counsel for Media, and counsel for defendants shall consult with one another on

a weekly basis to discuss the manner in which the testimony of the State’s anticipated

witnesses shall be recorded under Rule 22. For any specific witnesses for whom there are

legitimate security concerns that can be substantiated by the witness or the State

(hereinafter “special circumstances witnesses”), the witness or the State may request that

only audio of their testimony be recorded. In addition, for any specific alleged victims for

whom there are legitimate security concerns that can be substantiated by the alleged

victim or the State (hereinafter “special circumstances victims”), the alleged victim or the

State may request that during the limited period of the livestreaming of such person’s

testimony, such person’s identity (to include such person’s first and last name) be

Page 1 of 3
 temporarily obscured or redacted in said livestream and that such person’s first and last

initials only be livestreamed during the limited pendency of such person’s testimony.

Such list of special circumstances witnesses and special circumstances victims shall be

circulated by counsel for the State to Media Intervenors and counsel for the defense by

5pm on Friday at the end of each week. If Media Intervenors or any defendant objects to

the witness’s, the alleged victim’s, or the State’s request, Media Intervenors or any

objecting defendant shall be required to bring their objection to the attention of the Court

by 9am the following Monday for resolution prior to such witness’s or alleged victim’s

testimony. If neither Media Intervenors nor any defendant raises an objection to the

witness’s, the alleged victim’s, or the State’s request or if such objection is overruled, the

pool video camera and all authorized users of other cameras in the courtroom shall be

instructed by the Court that video or still photographic images of the witness cannot be

taken while the witness is in the courtroom, or, in the case of alleged victims, that such

person’s first and last initials only be livestreamed during the limited pendency of such

person’s testimony, provided, however, that livestreaming or subsequent publication of

recordings in which counsel, the Court, or any witness refers to alleged victims by name

shall not be attributable to Media Intervenors as a violation of the terms of this Order.

2. In the event a media organization streams the pool video of the trial in this case in

conjunction with a “live chat” containing comments of online observers, such media

organization shall undertake, in the case of special circumstances witness and special

circumstances victims, a good faith effort to remove from such chat any threatening

commentary about witnesses as well as any commentary providing identifying

information regarding the witnesses, including, but not limited to, their purported

Page 2 of 3
 address, phone number, current/former employer, or other sensitive personally

identifiable information.

3. Nothing in this Order shall limit the right of the media to report on information that has

already been publicly disclosed in these proceedings, is disclosed during the course of the

trial, or is otherwise made a matter of public record.

4. Except as specifically set forth herein, nothing in this Order shall limit the right of the

media to record any portion of the trial in this case, consistent with any Rule 22 Order

that has been or may be entered by the Court.

SO ORDERED this 8th day of February 2024.

______________________________
Judge Ural Glanville
Chief Judge
Superior Court of Fulton County
Atlanta Judicial Circuit

Page 3 of 3