At a pretrial conference on a case set for jury selection Dec. 1, counsel and the court discussed outstanding witness materials and whether trial testimony should remain available on the court’s YouTube channel.

The prosecutor told the court that investigators had been unable to get additional witnesses to speak and that there were no written witness statements; defense counsel asked the court to consider the details the state had proffered previously. The judge requested written submissions from both sides and set a near term deadline, asking for responses by Thursday or Friday so she could make a ruling before the upcoming trial week.

On the broadcasting question, counsel reminded the judge of an earlier discussion about limiting public streaming in sensitive child‑victim matters. The judge said she did not recall definitively promising that the trial would be removed from YouTube and asked the parties to put their requested accommodations in writing so she could evaluate them closer to trial: “If you will also reach out... put whatever you need in writing, and then I’ll make that decision when it gets a little closer.”

What happens next: Counsel were told to file written submissions by the court’s stated deadline; the judge said she will issue a written ruling on additional witness permissibility and any broadcasting restrictions by Friday.