Alamance News publisher Tom Boney, Jr. protested Alamance County superior court judge C. Douglas Green’s decision to unilaterally close an Alamance County courtroom to the public Monday, during part of a murder trial; Green cited unspecified potential threats to the safety of the defendant and his family members.
The closure lasted about an hour.
An hour after he excused jurors until 2:00 p.m., Green announced at 11:35 a.m. Monday morning, “Because of the nature of some of testimony [about to be given], we are going to have to ask everyone who’s not associated with this case to clear the courtroom.”
The closure came amid a “404(b)” evidentiary hearing and testimony to establish the admissibility of pending drug trafficking charges against the defendant, Garyonded Stepney, unrelated to the murder charge for which he was on trial.
Green ultimately offered a partial explanation to Boney when he appeared in superior court Monday afternoon to protest the closure.
“I seriously object to your closure as being unlawful, improper, and unprecedented,” the publisher told the judge.
U.S. Supreme Court precedents have established that a judge must hold a hearing on whether to close a courtroom and then make findings to support closure, Boney told Green. “I’m surprised, disappointed, that your honor was not familiar [with precedents that have repeatedly established that all courts shall be open].”
U.S. Supreme Court guidelines also require a judge to make written findings to support the closure – outlining how doing so would serve an overriding interest, such as protecting witnesses, preserving the defendant’s right to a fair trial, or avoiding disclosure of sensitive information – and it must be “narrowly tailored,” the publisher said.
“It must be absolutely necessary for the interest of justice,” Boney said, before requesting a transcript of that portion of the proceedings that were closed.
“You must hold a hearing on the motion to close and [enter] findings of fact to justify the closure,” Boney told Green, citing several court precedents, as well as the North Carolina Constitution, which states: “All courts shall be open.”
Green told Boney, “My reasoning is there was testimony with regards to substantial assistance by the defendant [that] could endanger him or his family. I am not going to put this man’s life or his family’s life in danger [based on information to which officers testified during the hearing that was closed to the public].”
Adding that he’d expected the publisher to object, Green told Boney, “You can appeal…but it’s not going to change my mind right now. When someone’s life can be in danger, if [his] family’s life may be in danger, it does [justify closure],” said Green, acknowledging that he had done so at the request of the defense attorney, Carter.
The judge told the publisher that he’d be “all for it,” if he wanted to have the newspaper’s attorney present to argue on the objection to closure and motion to intervene at some other time. “I’m all for it, but I’m not going to delay [this hearing] at this time,” Green said.
Meanwhile, the lead prosecutor, chief assistant D.A. Alex Bass, offered to narrow all of his other arguments on the “404(b)” hearing about the admissibility of other alleged drug trafficking charges so that the courtroom could remain open.
The newspaper formalized its objection to the closed proceedings in a written motion at the end of court on Monday and requested a written order detailing the basis for closing the courts to the public.
Green assured the publisher that he would enter an order and make findings to support closure, which he did late Wednesday afternoon.
In his order for a limited closure, Green again reiterated unspecified concern for the defendant’s “safety and the safety of his family.”
Another investigator, Keshon Purvis, had been in the midst of testifying – nearly an hour after Green had excused the jury around 10:37 a.m. Monday – about evidence seized during a July 2021 search of the apartment where Stepney had been living in Greensboro when Carter interjected, asking to approach the bench.
Following a brief discussion, the judge and both attorneys retired to his chambers, after which he instructed anyone seated in the courtroom gallery who was not directly involved with the case to leave.
“The defense argued that [the four officers’] testimonies were going to reveal information regarding high levels of drug trafficking where the ‘cartel’ was possibly involved,” as well as “sensitive law enforcement operations that could endanger Stepney or his family, Green wrote in his order for limited closure of court.
Carter, however, had asserted during the final day of testimony on Monday and during his closing argument Tuesday that no evidence had been presented to suggest any cartel involvement in the botched robbery and murder in Green Level in April 2021.
Green also entered an order late Wednesday afternoon, overruling the newspaper’s objection to the closed proceeding and denying its motion to be heard in opposition to the court closures. He cited a 1984 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, Waller v. Georgia, which established that “the press and public have a qualified First Amendment right to attend a criminal trial.”
Green also concluded that the state constitutional guarantee – “that all courts shall be open” – “is not absolute” and cited a different state law, which authorizes a presiding judge to place reasonable limitations on courtroom access in order to ensure the order or safety of those present.
Green also concluded that his decision to close courtroom for what he described on Monday as “about an hour” had passed the tests outlined in Waller, as well as Press-Enterprise Co. V. Superior Court of California.
The judge did not, however, address the most-frequently cited case, Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, which established that the right to attend criminal trials is an implicit guarantee of the First Amendment.
Moreover, Green also asserted that both the prosecutors and defense attorney had agreed to the closure and had agreed that it would likely be unfairly prejudicial to the defendant if the four law enforcement officers testified to the 404(b) evidence in open court.
Green’s order overruling the newspaper’s objection also states that he made findings that there was adequate support for closing the courtroom. The findings were filed as part of his order for partial closure 2½ days later – shortly before the close of business on Wednesday afternoon.
Yet jurors heard testimony late Monday afternoon from three of the four witnesses who testified during the closure: Kernersville police officer Garrett Adams; detective Jose Jasso of the Guilford County sheriff’s office; and Greensboro police detective Daniel Kroh.
Adams testified to the circumstances surrounding Stepney’s arrest in Kernersville in November 2025, when he was charged with: two counts of felony trafficking cocaine; one count of felony possession with intent to manufacture, sell, or deliver cocaine; one felony count of maintaining a vehicle/dwelling/or other place for a controlled substance; misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia and driving while impaired; and a traffic infraction, failure to maintain lane control. Those charges remain pending in the Forsyth County court system, according to the court files.
Jasso testified to the circumstances surrounding Stepney’s arrest in March 2023, when he was charged with: four counts of felony trafficking cocaine; one count of felony possession with intent to manufacture, sell, or deliver marijuana; and one count of felony possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Those charges remain pending in Guilford County.
And Kroh testified to the circumstances surrounding Stepney’s arrest in Greensboro in July 2021, when he was charged with first-degree murder in connection with the robbery in Green Level earlier that year, as well as subsequent, unrelated drug trafficking charges. The drug-related charges remain pending in Guilford County.
Read the newspaper’s editorial page views on the courtroom closure: https://alamancenews.com/secret-justice-undermines-public-confidence-in-judicial-system/
