Nima Momeni’s lawyers want his trial moved out of San Francisco

The request came Thursday after the San Francisco Standard published a series of photos Tuesday showing Momeni, 39, wearing his orange suit while fixing his hair, subtly smiling, posing and looking out through his solitary jail cell. 

Momeni’s lawyers said the photos and “unfair media coverage” are prejudicial and may prevent him from having a fair trial, NBC Bay Area (KNTV-TV) reported. The murder trial is scheduled to take place March 15. 

The San Francisco District Attorney’s Office confirmed to SFGATE that Momeni’s next court date is Jan. 25, when the trial venue request will be considered. SFGATE contacted the three lawyers representing Momeni and did not receive a response.

Momeni was booked into the San Francisco County Jail #3 in San Bruno on April 13 without bail on suspicion of murder, according to jail records. Momeni was arrested in connection with the fatal stabbing of Lee, 43, on April 4. 

The photos taken by Paul Kuroda, a freelance photographer, show Momeni awaiting trial in solitary confinement, where he’s spent the past seven months. He was photographed with multiple books, including a book titled “Napoleon: A Life” and a psychology book. 

Julie Makinen, editor-in-chief at the San Francisco Standard, told SFGATE in a statement that the photos were entirely newsworthy.

When the outlet contacted Momeni’s attorneys before the photos were published, Makinen said they “did not raise objections or concerns about the publication of the images.” She said that the photographer had permission to take photos inside the jail and Momeni gave the photographer permission to take his photo. 

The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office said it is launching an investigation to determine how the photographer was granted permission to take photos, NBC Bay Area reported. The sheriff’s office told the outlet that the photographer violated “established media rules.”

Andrea Roth, a professor of criminal justice law at UC Berkeley School of Law, told SFGATE it’s usually difficult to prove that pretrial media coverage is “bad enough to violate due process” or that it would taint jury selection. One of the ways prosecutors avoid impartial trials, which may apply to cases like Momeni’s, she said, is by allowing both parties in the trial to ask jurors an extensive amount of questions to strike anyone off the jury that may not be impartial. 

“You could do a jury questionnaire in general; those are seen as sufficient to protect the defendant’s interest,” Roth said. “So I’m not saying that it wouldn’t rise to that level in this case, but it’s kind of a high bar, kind of a high burden.”

What’s more, because the photos were posted online, they could be seen anywhere, even in a new venue. “It’s possible that people in New York don’t care as much about the case or Kansas or wherever, but in terms of having seen [the photos] it’s pretty easy for people in another group to have seen them as well,” she said.

Even with the headlines, such as one in the New York Post calling the photos “bone-chilling,” Roth said pretrial prejudice would still be difficult to determine. 

“[The defense] would have to show a reasonable likelihood that they couldn’t get a fair and impartial trial,” shesaid. “But again, in deciding that the judge is going to imagine that there’s going to be extensive jury questionnaires and questioning of jurors.”