Proceedings during a pretrial hearing for Brian Rowsey on Friday were briefly interrupted when Judge Christopher Russell ordered Rowsey taken into custody for contempt of court for insulting Buena Vista Commonwealth’s Attorney Josh Elrod.
It turned out to be a misunderstanding.
Russell thought he heard Rowsey refer to Elrod as “this here toad,” when Rowsey was actually referring to “this here code,” meaning a printed copy of the section of the Virginia State Code he’s been charged under for conducting an illegal gambling operation.
After conferring with the bailiffs in the courtroom and asking the clerk of court to listen to the recording of the hearing, Russell apologized to Rowsey for the misunderstanding and dismissed the contempt citation.
Rowsey, who is facing three counts of conducting an illegal gambling operation, contends that the code section he’s been charged under requires any such operation be in continuous operation for at least 30 days and make $2,000 or more in gross revenue on any given day.
While the code section does contain language that lists those requirements, Elrod contended the phrasing of the section indicates that they are requirements for an aggravated violation of the code section and not required for a conviction.
Russell declined to formally rule on that issue, though he did say that he felt Elrod’s interpretation was “an accurate reading” of the section. He also told Rowsey that he was free to make the argument that the evidence presented did not meet the burden of the statute at the upcoming trial.
Russell also ruled on several other motions during the hearing.
He granted motions from Rowsey, who is representing himself, that he be allowed to testify on his own behalf and to make opening and closing statements, confirming that those rights are allowed to every defendant.
Rowsey also filed several motions asking for the charges to be dismissed due to Elrod not turning over evidence to him despite repeated requests. Elrod presented Russell with a discovery order, which Russell signed, and Elrod then handed Rowsey a flashdrive containing the commonwealth’s evidence for the trial. With the issue of evidence resolved, Russell dismissed the motions related to that argument.
Russell also denied a request from Rowsey to be present when the pool of potential jurors was generated ahead of the trial, but noted that Rowsey will be allowed to participate in the process of selecting a jury from that pool of candidates at the beginning of the trial.
Elrod also presented two motions for the hearing. The first was to amend the dates on two of the three indictments from specific dates to date ranges. For the first indictment, the request was to change the date from Jan. 16, 2025, to a range of Dec. 1, 2024, through Jan. 16, 2025. The second indictment had a date of Jan. 19, and Elrod requested that be amended to Jan. 17 through Feb. 12, 2025.
Rowsey objected to the motion, arguing that there was no evidence to support the amendment of the dates, and pointed to the fact that Elrod’s motion requested the first indictment be amended to a period of Dec. 1, 2025, through Jan. 16, 2025. Elrod acknowledged that the motion did say that, and that it was a typo. Russell granted that motion over Rowsey’s objection.
Elrod also presented a motion to request that Rowsey refrain from alluding to facts not in evidence at the trial and from posting about the case on his Facebook page going forward. Russell did not offer a formal ruling on that motion, but did warn Rowsey about posting on Facebook. Rowsey argued that he had “a right to free speech on Facebook,” to which Russell responded, “You don’t have a right to poison the jury pool.”
Rowsey’s trial is scheduled for Nov. 6 and 7 in Buena Vista Circuit Court.
