In effort to slow press coverage, judge clamps down on attorney in Churaman case
/
Prakash Churaman stands outside of the Queens Criminal Courthouse ahead of a May 10 hearing as dozens rally against his prosecution. Eagle photo by Jacob Kaye
By Jacob Kaye
Tensions were high in Queens Criminal Court Tuesday during an emergency hearing in the case of Prakash Churaman, a Queens man arrested as a teen in 2014 on felony murder charges who had his conviction overturned in 2020.
Queens County Supreme Court, Criminal Term Judge Kenneth Holder called for the hearing last week following the publishing of a story by Hell Gate. The outlet reported that the two detectives who interrogated Churaman at the time of his arrest as a 15-year-old were recently the subject of a $2 million settlement stemming from a lawsuit that alleged that the duo and eight other NYPD officials withheld exonerating evidence in a separate 2015 Queens murder case.
But the detectives were not the subject of Tuesday’s hearing.
Instead, Holder issued a protective order against Jose Nieves, Churaman’s attorney and former candidate for Queens district attorney. Nieves, as per Holder’s order, will now be unable to physically share evidence in the case with his client, who will only be allowed to view the evidence in Nieves’ office. The order, according to Holder, is designed to limit communications with the press.
At the close of the hearing, Nieves said that he’d be appealing Holder’s order with the Appellate Division, Second Department prior to the start of Churaman’s retrial, expected to begin in June.
Holder argued Tuesday that the defense had been disseminating information about the case to members of the press, an accusation Nieves denied. Holder made specific reference to two pieces of potential evidence that he believes has been shared with the media – the settlement and information about NYPD Detectives Barry Brown and Daniel Gallagher allegedly coercing a confession out of Churaman.
Both the settlement and information about the interrogation, which was detailed in Churaman’s successful 2020 appeal of his original conviction, are publicly available.
The judge also said that Nieves’ comments made to the press about the $2 million settlement manipulated the meaning of the settlement and could potentially affect the jury pool in the retrial expected to begin next month.
“When you say something, it has meaning, it has impact,” Holder said. “It is potentially a scenario where you could improperly affect the fairness of a jury…you could impact your client receiving a fair trial.”
Last week, Nieves told the Eagle that he had first learned of the settlement, which he believes to have relevance in Churaman’s case, when recently contacted by Hell Gate. However, Nieves admitted Tuesday that the Queens district attorney's office had sent him the index number of the case about a year ago, but said that he was unaware of the details of the case.
“I knew the index number, I did not know that the people dismissed a homicide case,” he said.
For the majority of the hearing, Nieves and Holder engaged in a back-and-forth that, at times, resulted in both of them shouting over each other.
“This is my courtroom and don’t you forget that,” Holder said at one point.
Though the district attorney's office had allegedly filed a motion requesting the protection order be issued, Holder said Tuesday that he was issuing it on his own accord.
The order also applies to any piece of new evidence in the case. Should new evidence arise, Holder said he doesn’t “want any of it to go to the press.”
Prosecutors allege that Churaman orchestrated the 2014 robbery of a Jamaica home that led to the shooting death of 21-year-old Taquane Clark.
Though they don’t accuse him of pulling the trigger, prosecutors charged Churaman under the felony murder rule – the rule, which is used in over 40 states, says that if a death occurs during the commission of a felony, the death can be charged as murder for all participants in the alleged felony, even if they had no role in the death or the intention to kill.
An elderly woman who lived in the home during the robbery later told police that while she was being held up by the intruders, she recognized Churaman’s voice, who was friend’s with Clark’s brother, and identified him as one of the suspects.
The “earwitness” is allegedly the only piece of evidence tying him to the scene.
Churaman says he was coerced into confessing to participating in the murder by Brown, who also the led the interrogation of Chanel Lewis, the man charged in the 2016 killing of Karina Vetrano in Howard Beach. Lewis later said that he too was coerced into confessing to the crime.
His conviction was overturned in 2020 after his attorneys successfully argued that Holder had illegally prevented Churaman from calling an expert on juvenile confessions at trial.
Churaman, who spent four years as a teen detained on Rikers Island and several more in a New York prison, has been on house arrest, living with his mother and newborn child in their Queens home since his conviction was overturned.
He turned down a plea deal from the district attorney in the months following the appellate ruling, insisting he get the chance to prove his innocence.
Churaman’s case has garnered more and more attention since then, with a growing number of supporters showing up before his hearings – Tuesday marked the 96th time he had appeared in Queens Criminal Court.
In January, Holder ordered Churaman to stop speaking from the steps of the courthouse to his supporters.
Churaman has received support from Queens-based nonprofit Desis Rising Up and Moving and a number of elected officials who have called on Queens District Attorney Melinda Katz, who inherited the case from former Queens District Attorney Richard Brown, to drop the charges against him.
City Councilmember Shekar Krishnan, who represents Jackson Heights and Elmhurst, was at Tuesday’s rally and called Churaman’s case a “corrupt prosecution.”
“There is no reason at all that this prosecution has to continue and I think the only just solution here is for DA Katz to drop all charges,” Krishnan told the Eagle.
The Queens lawmaker added that he disagreed with Holder’s order issued Tuesday.
“I think the court should be far more concerned, not with any kinds of protective or gag orders and communications with the press by Prakash or his lawyer, but frankly, much more concerned with the fact that there have been Brady violations in this case, and that exculpatory information was withheld,” he said. “The court should be focused on that.”
