Judge agrees to release evidence in Yale strangling case

A judge ruled Friday to release some of the evidence next week in the case of a man suspected of strangling Yale graduate student Annie Le.

But New Haven Superior Court Judge Roland Fasano said certain sensitive information will remain confidential, and his ruling to release the remainder gave attorneys for the prosecution and the accused, Raymond Clark III, enough time to appeal if they wish.

>>UPDATE: Click here to see the 11/13/09 update, "Annie Le secret evidence released Friday"

Wednesday is a state holiday in Connecticut, and it was not immediately clear whether the documents would be released earlier. Joseph Lopez, one of Clark's public defenders, told The Associated Press Friday he did not think his client would appeal.

Fasano said the information that will be kept confidential includes "material that is inflammatory; material of significant import that is unfairly prejudicial to the defendant; and material that constitutes an invasion of privacy unnecessary to the public's understanding of the criminal process."

The ruling follows a request by news organizations, including The Associated Press, The Hartford Courant and The New York Times, to open up sealed warrants against Clark. They argued the documents are subject to public view under Connecticut and common law and that much of the information already had been leaked to the media.

Since his Sept. 17 arrest, the government has not made public why police believe Clark, 24, was the one who killed Le and hid her body in the basement of a university laboratory. Both Clark and Le worked at that lab, Clark as an animal technician, Le as a doctoral researcher in pharmacology.

Information leaked anonymously said Clark's DNA matched crime scene evidence, that he had defensive marks on his body, sent a message to Le the day of her disappearance and that electronic-lock records show he was the last person to see her alive.

Both the prosecution and Clark's defense team opposed the warrants' release. Prosecutors argue that making the warrants public would unduly invade the privacy of Le's family; the defense argues that publicizing them would jeopardize Clark's right to a fair trial in a case that already has attracted ferocious media attention.