There’s an argument over a wall in Denver, Colo.

As Timothy McVeigh is tried in the Oklahoma bombing case, journalists want the scoop. This time they want the judge to tear down a wall that partially obscures the jurors from the courtroom audience. If Judge Richard Matsch doesn’t do this, the media wants to “unseal juror members and transcripts of closed-door arguments to dismiss jurors for legal cause,” said an Associated Press report.

Matsch, who doesn’t want his courtroom or its players to be focused on the media, refused both requests.

The controversial wall was built, Matsch said, to eliminate juror distraction or intimidation from a closed-circuit television camera. The camera is a window for bombing victims and survivors in Oklahoma City to see how the trial progresses.

Matsch also refused to drop a court order that prohibits attorneys on the case from talking to the news media. At a hearing on Saturday, the order was hotly contested by the media, as well as by McVeigh’s lead attorney, Stephen Jones. Jones said there should be a less-restrictive order because he is the only voice for McVeigh to the public. “I don’t seek relief from the court’s order to become a media star,” he said. The media’s argument was based on a constitutional right to receive information.

Although Matsch didn’t drop the order, he may loosen it. Matsch said he didn’t want lawyers to become “spin artists” for the case because it is his right to control public opinion of the case.

For the most part, Matsch’s protection of his courtroom is a good call. But for journalists wanting the whole story, as of now, they are out of luck.

It’s understandable that Matsch doesn’t want the Oklahoma bombing case to be a media circus like the O.J. Simpson case. Outside attractions moved around the Simpson jury pool quite often.

We found out that some jurors had book deals on the back burner after they reached a verdict. We also learned that one juror had connections to one of the lawyers on the case.

The Simpson trial also brought to light the personal life of Marcia Clark, as well as that of Simpson’s lawyers. Analysts were frequently looking at the demographic make-up of the jury and predicting how the evidence and testimony presented that day would affect their opinions.

Also, Kato Kaelin became a celebrity from his testimony. Since then, we’ve seen him posing with the stars at show biz awards shows.

That’s what the Oklahoma City bombing judge doesn’t want happening.

Although this trial isn’t on television, journalists contend their interest is centered on the fact that so many people have been hurt or affected by the bombing. Unlike the Simpson trial, many people were hurt, not the two killed in Brentwood, Calif.

It’s also understandable that journalists want to know more. They want to know how the case is coming along in the trial of a man who is accused of striking terror in the heart of nearly every American. They want to know not only what the jury is thinking, but who they are.

But knowing this would bring in the analysts and many things that Matsch fears will enter his courtroom.

The media says it has a right to receive information about the jurors and the trial to inform the public.

They do. It’s a constitutional right called the First Amendment. But Timothy McVeigh also has the right to a fair trial and an impartial jury. It’s a constitutional right called the Sixth Amendment.

What’s to come is up to Matsch and what he will allow courtroom participants and spectators to do. Whatever happens, Matsch and the trial are sitting on a fine line between two conflicting constitutional rights.

---

Erin Payne is a junior in journalism and mass communication and political science from Rock Rapids.