A judge ruled recently that a legal team responsible for playing recordings of a woman screaming in Philadelphia during the early hours must…stop.
But why are they even doing that in the first place?
At a glance:
- A federal judge has ordered lawyers in a Philadelphia civil rights case to apologize for conducting a disruptive “scream test” in a residential area.
- The test featured a continuous recording of a woman’s screams, disturbing residents near South Broad Street and Passyunk Avenue.
- The judge’s ruling requires written and in-person apologies to those affected.
Lawyers representing Termaine Hicks, a man suing the city of Philadelphia for his wrongful conviction and nearly two-decade imprisonment, have been ordered by U.S. Judge John F. Murphy to formally apologize for conducting a “scream test” that disrupted a residential neighborhood in the early morning hours of September 23. The test involved playing a continuous recording of a woman’s screams near homes and a daycare center, causing significant distress among local residents.
The legal team carried out the test as part of their case against the city and several police officers, arguing that the screams could have been heard from two blocks away on the night Hicks was wrongfully arrested in 2001. Hicks, who was shot three times by police at the scene, had his conviction for sexual assault vacated in 2020. He claims that he was trying to help the victim rather than attack her, as previously alleged.
Judge Murphy criticized the lawyers’ actions, labeling the test as “deeply disturbing and potentially dangerous.” He emphasized that the lawyers showed a lack of concern for the community’s well-being, violating ethical standards. The judge’s ruling requires the legal team to mail apology letters to all homes and businesses in the affected area, as well as to personally visit some residents to apologize face-to-face.
Rachel Robbins, one of the neighbors impacted by the scream test, described the experience as “jarring” and “awful.” Her concerns led her to contact the city, which responded by clarifying that the test was conducted by an expert retained by the plaintiff, limiting the city’s control over the situation.
The law firm responsible for the test, Neufeld Scheck Brustin Hoffman & Freudenberger, LLP, expressed remorse for the distress caused, stating that while they did not intend harm, they understand why residents were upset. The firm has until the end of October to comply with the court’s order, including submitting proof that they carried out the required apologies.
This is one of our weirder stories for the day…
