I was hoping to see your thoughts on this case, and I will keep reading the thread in case you have additional comments, but related to the 1st Amendment issue,

I was hoping to see your thoughts on this case, and I will keep reading the thread in case you have additional comments, but related to the 1st Amendment issue, what does it matter what the charges are? Whether the charge is distribution of stolen information or threatening a federal authority, does the Defendant have the right to defend himself publicly in the media? For example George Zimmerman did Fox News interviews prior to trial (and did not have to testify as a result). Obviously this can be distinguished from the Martha Stewart case where she used media to maintain her innocence for the insider trading charges and she was subsequently charged with artificially maintaining the price of her own Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc.(MSLO) stock vis-a-vis here "innocence media campaign", although the commercial speech standard was applied in this instance. Thoughts?