Defense attorneys for a Frederick man accused of killing his wife and daughters have filed a motion asking the government to investigate whether the prosecution has made extrajudicial statements or tried to prevent the spread of prejudicial information.

While the motion itself does not appear on the Weld County District Court’s website, a court order asking the prosecution to respond to the motion was recently posted after being filed on Aug. 29.

Stan Garnett, the former district attorney for Boulder County, said it is not unusual for the defense to raise such issues early on, especially in high-profile cases.

The case of Christopher Watts, 33, is certainly high profile, having garnered national headlines for weeks. Watts is accused of killing his wife, 34-year-old Shanann Watts, and two daughters, 4-year-old Bella and 3-year-old Celeste. Shanann Watts also was 15 weeks pregnant with a boy, who Shanann Watts’ family said would be named Nico.

Christopher Watts is charged with three counts of first-degree murder after deliberation, two counts of first-degree murder — victim under 12 /position of trust, one count of first-degree unlawful termination of pregnancy and three counts of tampering with a deceased human body.

While it’s standard to point out potential to prejudice a jury , Garnett said the wording of the motion — requiring “the government” to investigate the issue — is unusual.

It raises an issue, as the district attorney’s office is part of the executive branch of the state.

“If you’re asking them to be investigated, who would do it?” Garnett said.

The prosecution had until Sept. 5 to file a response to the motion, though a response is not yet included on the case’s page online.

While the court case is still in its early stages and little information has been released, a number of news outlets have reported new details on the case, citing “sources close to the investigation.”

It’s doubtful many more details will be released before Christopher Watts’ next court appearance on Nov. 19.

Krista Henery, community relations director for the Weld County District Attorney’s Office, said staff members in her office are following court orders.

Prosecutors are required to follow the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct, which forbids them from saying something outside of court that could create prejudice in a legal proceeding.

Other than charging documents and press conferences discussing the arrest affidavit, the district attorney hasn’t released any more information.

Frederick police Detective Dave Baumhover said the department also has a policy against making extrajudicial statements.

Henery and Baumhover said they can’t speak for other agencies involved in the case, which include the FBI and Colorado Bureau of Investigation.

The FBI declined to comment on the issue and referred questions to the district attorney and Frederick police. CBI did not return a phone call seeking comment.

However, if anyone from the prosecution is making extrajudicial statements, Garnett said the onus would fall on the district attorney, who is tasked with ensuring law enforcement complies with the rules.

The 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that spurred the creation of such rules — Sheppard v. Maxwell — ended in an overturned murder conviction due to the pervasive publicity and incriminating information not presented at trial.

In that case, prosecutors were “just kinda constantly playing to the press on it,” Garnett said, which is why district attorneys are now careful about what they say outside of court.

“What the rules are trying to do is strike a balance between protecting the defendant’s right to be tried by an impartial jury and the public’s right to know,” he said.

Madeline St. Amour: 303-684-5212, mstamour@prairiemountainmedia.com