What is the criteria for an alibi that meets the Idaho statute? I've tried to research it but haven't had much luck. Not trying to disagree I just don't understand what you are talking about.
Thanks
The prosecution doesn't believe that the defense has met the criteria of an alibi defense as stated in the Idaho statute. However, the judge has discretion regarding how he wants to proceed regarding the alibi defense, according to Idaho statute. And since this is a death penalty case, it's possible that the judge will allow the defense some latitude with regard to their alibi defense.
The defense believes that the prosecution has the evidence for their alibi defense, and in response to the prosecution's motion that the defense include in their alibi defense information that meets the criteria of the Idaho statute, the defense had requested/proposed to the judge that they (the defense) hold an
ex parte hearing with the judge in order to discuss the content of their alibi defense and what the prosecution says it is lacking.
In proposing an
ex parte hearing with the judge, he defense wanted the opportunity to explain to the judge what they believe they can prove from the cell evidence,
but does not want to give this information to the prosecution, hence the request made by the defense for an ex parte hearing with the judge without the prosecution present.
I don't think it has ever been confirmed if this offer of/request for an
ex parte hearing of the defense with the judge ever took place, however the process of requesting this hearing sheds light on the reasons why the defense's alibi defense does not meet the exact criterion in the Idaho code.
Edited to add: Last year, throughout the month of August 2023 on this forum here on WS, there was extensive discussion of the Idaho Code regarding the alibi defense and also the prosecution's motion to compel and the defense's suggestion that an
ex parte hearing be held with the defense and the judge in order for the defense to explain their reasoning behind the alibi defense issue.
For additional information, you may want to go back to read those posts where this was extensively discussed. There was some good discussion that was informative and shed light on the whole alibi defense law, it's intent, and how it was being implemented by the defense and the prosecution in this case.
