A federal judge has upheld an order preventing the release of surveillance video showing the beating of a teenage burglary suspect, ruling its release would prevent a fair criminal trial of four Houston police officers.

Houston attorney Benjamin Hall, who filed a separate federal civil rights suit against two officers on behalf of Chad Holley and his family, had asked the federal court's permission to release the surveillance video.

"We certainly respect the judge's decision and the defendants' right to a fair trial," said Jeff Cohen, editor of the Houston Chronicle. "But we're also vigorous advocates for the public's right to know, and we don't believe that should wait for a court date."

A trial date has not been set for any of the four officers who are facing criminal charges over an arrest that occurred seven months ago.

Hearst Newspapers and the Houston Chronicle, along with television stations KPRC Local 2, KHOU-TV, KTRK-TV Houston and KRIV-TV joined Hall in asking the judge to release the tape so the public could view it.

The tape, which was subpoenaed by Hall, shows what has been described as a vicious attack on Holley, who was 15 at the time, as he lay face down with his arms behind his neck. District Attorney Pat Lykos later joined a motion by ex-HPD officer Andrew T. Blombergto keep the tape secret until state criminal trials against all the officers are concluded.

If the video is released, "in all likelihood it will repeatedly be streamed on television and the Internet into every home and venue, seen by millions of persons, and become the subject of pervasive opinioned commentary," reads the order issued Monday by U.S. District Judge Ewing Werlein Jr. in Houston.

Werlein's ruling is not a gag order preventing the media from posting the video but instead prevents Hall or any of his employees from releasing the tape until the criminal trials of the four officers are concluded.

Lykos and Houston Police Chief Charles McClelland said they were unaware of the March 23 beating of Holley until they received an unsolicited video from a New York company that operates a storage facility in southwest Houston.

Seven officers fired

On June 23, McClelland fired seven officers seen on the video. That same day, a Harris County grand jury returned misdemeanor charges against four of those officers. Blomberg and Drew Ryser both face official oppression charges. Raad Hassan and Philip Bryan were charged with violating a prisoner's civil rights as well as official oppression.

Blomberg and Hassan also have been sued by Hall in federal court for violating Holley's civil rights.

Werlein ruled that if the tape were released, attempts to overcome prejudicial publicity by moving it to another city, sequestering the jury or conducting intensive questioning of potential jurors "would be wholly inadequate." Its release would pose a "substantial likelihood of prejudice" against the officers in both state criminal trials and the federal civil suit, the judge ruled.

Hall said the judge's ruling did not address whether the surveillance tape he submitted into evidence is a now public record in the court file.

Centerpiece of trial

The effort by the defendants to keep the tape secret "is nothing more than a last-ditch effort to prevent the public from seeing an unflattering video," according to court arguments filed by attorneys for Hearst and the four Houston television stations.

"We fail to see how jurors will react any differently whether the tape is shown before or during trial," Cohen said. "This is not about shielding them from inadmissible evidence or one-sided claims. Everyone, including the judge, acknowledges that the tape will be the centerpiece of any trial. Police are paid by taxpayers who have a right to see — without delay — how their employees are behaving."

The judge cited a Sept. 29 guest column in the Houston Chronicle by Bill King and agreed with King's conclusions that the tape's release would result in "widespread pervasive exposure."

King, a lawyer and former mayor of Kemah, is not a Houston Chronicle employee, and his views are not those of the Chronicle's editorial board.

King said he was "thrilled the judge reads my column" but didn't have an opinion about the ruling's merits.

james.pinkerton@chron.com