Hearing looks into exclusion of public from jury selection at Larry Seabrook trial

A Manhattan federal judge insisted Wednesday that she did not exclude the public from jury selection at the 2012 corruption trial of former Bronx power broker Larry Seabrook in unusual testimony at a hearing on his bid to overturn his conviction.

The hearing was ordered by the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals after Seabrook's brother and a friend said U.S. District Judge Deborah Batts and a clerk effectively ejected them by telling them to "vacate" their seats as dozens of prospective jurors entered.

But Batts, who was reversed by the circuit in an immigration fraud case in late 2012 for violating "public trial" rights by clearing her court during jury selection, said she knew that decision was coming at the time of Seabrook's June trial and had already learned her lesson and changed her policy.

"At the time of the Seabrook trial, the policy was there was access to the courtroom," Batts, a 20-year veteran of the bench, testified at a fact-finding hearing before fellow U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel. "There were limitations on seating."

She said she told spectators to vacate their seats because she wanted them to make room and not "taint" prospective jurors by sitting with them, but wasn't ordering them to get out.

"I told them to leave their seats," she added. " . . . I don't know where they went."

Seabrook, a former Democratic City Council member and former state legislator, was convicted of scheming to funnel city money through nonprofits he controlled to friends, relatives and a girlfriend. Batts sentenced him to 5 years in prison.

At Wednesday's hearing, his older brother, Oliver, and a friend both testified that after Batts said to leave their seats, they went to a bench at the rear of the courtroom, but Batts' deputy clerk told them again to "vacate these seats" and motioned them toward the exit.

The clerk did not testify and said in an affidavit he couldn't remember what he said. Three government witnesses -- all associated with the Seabrook prosecution -- testified that they attended jury selection, and were not asked to leave.

Castel has to decide if the public was excluded. He or the appeals court could order a new trial if there was a constitutional violation. He ordered briefs by Dec. 16.