Noem announced on the morning of February 25 that she would release more evidence, but her plans changed that afternoon when a judge signed a gag order in response to Rensch filing a motion for the order protecting Ravnsborg’s procedural rights .
Noem posted the videos of the prosecutor’s objections and before he was allowed to see them, Rensch said in his application.
“My office received this email and we disagreed with the prosecutor’s legal arguments why we shouldn’t publish the evidence,” Noem said Thursday, adding that her office has no regrets sharing the videos .
The videos and other evidence were also released before a judge decided whether they would be admitted to court, Rensch told the Journal.
The sporadic release of evidence means that “people see pieces of the evidence and begin to draw their own conclusions,” he said. “It’s unfortunate that all of this stuff came out the way it was.”
“The public cannot choose,” said Ravnsborg’s guilt or innocence. A 12-member jury must determine this “beyond any doubt,” said Rensch. Pre-trial media coverage in high profile cases makes it “extremely difficult” to find jurors who have not yet made up their mind, and this case contains not only media coverage but also raw evidence that potential jurors may have seen.