I don't even know where to start with this latest motion.
The judge was making faces at us....
There can't be an end date to trial length because someone might get a flat tire....
The judge set the trial at three weeks. The defense had every opportunity THEN to say they needed more time. And justify why.
Their arguments are hypothetical beyond reason. If the prosecution uses up 8 days, they only get 5. If the State goes long, they won't get to defend RA. That didn't happen. The judge didn't, hasn't, wouldn't allow the state to use up all the days!! But regardless, the defense is IMO misrepresenting the situation. Judges DO schedule trials, based on input from both sides. No objection, she books the courtroom.
It wasn't until the 11th hour that defense suddenly cries fouls, demands more time than the junket can afford.... never mind that she granted them the additional time, just had to relocate it on the calendar. False comparison. Had they gone to trial, had the defense actually run out of time because of legitimate overages, the judge may have had to shuffle cases, put a pause on this case, resuming it. The defense can't KNOW that the judge would have truncated their defense!!! They're assuming that to make their (weak) point
As soon as they asked for more time, she granted it. Even though it was unfair to the State and caused an unfortunate delay to the trial....
To the other issue -- why were they planning to transport a felon to court anyway? Why couldn't he testify remotely, for everyone safety? Interesting that the Defense glosses over the fact that their supposed witness refused transport, presumably refusing to testify.
As to moving him, access to family and to his lawyers, is less critical than preserving his life while in protective custody. RA appears to need a great deal of babysitting, namely 24 hour monitoring and supervision, something only a well staffed prison (both hired staff and originally vetted prisoners) could provide.
I fear that the moment RA has an opportunity and a gap in supervision, he will be at serious risk of self-harm, including suicide. The defense continues to claim that RA is so emotionally compromised he's making false confessions. Are they in any position to judge how emotionally stable he is? How can they be certain he'd remain safe FROM HIMSELF in a less guarded facility?????
What an absolute travesty -- for the law, for RA himself, and for anyone who still loves him and /or simply values him as a human being, regardless of what he's alleged to have done -- if he were to commit suicide because supervision lagged.
The defense aren't doctors. Maybe RA isn't acting out or devolving because of conditions where he's at but because his mental health AND a residual ounce of conscience is eating away at him. Perhaps he doesn't need freedom from protective custody as much as freedom to unburden himself. The truth shall set you free, even in protective custody.
IMO the Defense is not defending him well if he seeks to confess. They should instead, if that's the case, represent as best they can, help present him in the most favorable way...
It has to be noted, that for all their claims of his supposed emotional collapse -- due to conditions, including Odinite guards -- they have not called for a mental health evaluation. Seems like Stsp 1, if they truly believe what they are saying. I don't Halen to think they do, believe what they are saying.
And finally, ding dong.
That was a sitcom exchange. A Who's On First comedy routine. And the defense still doesn't see how dumb it was. Let me re-write it, for clarity:
D: can we have a short recess?
J: why?
D: need a potty break
Here, the judge had to exercise her role as keeper of the time. It was butting up against the lunch hour. Mentally she's calculating for the jury whether that's the best time to break and to break for how long.
J: how long will you need? (Meaning, for this next portion, who do you still have for witnesses and NOT do you need enough time to go #1 or #2? Sheesh!)
D: well, it'll just be quick because (#1)
J: no, ding dong, (I'm not asking about your bowel/bladder habits but it's nice you just shared that with everyone), I'm just trying to determine whether I call for lunch now or wait until after your return from the brief recess and finish with this witness...
IMO the attorney must have REALLY had to go, so much so, it was all he could think of! So he jumped the gun thinking she was thinking of it to.
And how this differs from her EASY exchange with the State's request at a different time for a quick recess:
1. No one was doing a silent potty dance
And 2. The State probably wasn't asking for their recess right up against a logical break point like lunch.
Sorry for being wordy but I'm trying to distill 21 pages of over-wordiness.
JMO
drive.google.com
I would certainly hope so.
