I think it shows they need to get an answer as soon as possible pref before trial. Maybe it isn’t their fault the transcript isn’t ready yet. The deposition was done on Sept 13. It’s weeks ago. Whats the hold up I wonder?
I think they are doing a good job actually. They’re raising issues with the trial process and deposition responses or lack thereof are part of that imo.
I think you articulated my thought better than I did.
I agree with the majority of your post. That is exactly why the blood spatter in this case matters, because of the outrageous claim that it was purposeful and represents something specific that DT so badly wishes would point away from their client as the killer.
I would ask them to clarify or break the question into two parts if I were the deponent. I wonder if the P did this or not?
Right? And the way the new motion is worded the D makes it seem like there was no blood spatter expert from the state until sometime in 2024. I wonder if the state, suddenly decided to get a blood spatter guy because suddenly they worried the D may have a strong case as to what the spatter actually was (eg; intentional symbol vs the handprint of a badly wounded, dying girl). I wonder what investigators originally thought of the spatter marking then? Curious to know so much more.
We only know what the Defense wants us to 'know' (I don't trust half of what they've interpreted) and many things that the general public had no business knowing before trial.
Yes, and remember the first rule of interrogating a witness on the stand, never ask a question you don't already know the answer to. lol
I wonder how the 12 jurors might feel after the trial when / if they learn of the things being kept from them? I hope some will give interviews down the road. Moo.
UBM - to which "things" are you referring? They will see and hear evidence from the state and evidence from the defense. I am confused by your query.
It was said that the CSI and LE were emotionally and physically devastated by the crime scene as I can surely understand, this is real life not Hollywood. Abby and Libby, two innocent young girls were brutally murdered by a monster.
I mean I am not a lawyer but if I were the State, having seen even only the first of the long line of Franks Motions… you can bet I’d have an expert tell me his view that this is the handprint of a dying girl long before the State did in this case. That first Franks was filed last fall - but yet, no expert on board for the State until many many months later? So did the state not take any of the concerns in the Franks seriously then until closer to a trial date when they realized their back ends may be flappin in the breeze and maybe they should get someone?
I don’t think that the D were sanctioned because at the contempt hearing JG found they didn’t deliberately violate the order. Richard Allen's defense attorneys not held in contempt
, I get it. We both have very different opinions on this case and exactly whose back end is and will continue to be flappin in the breeze.I wonder how much of this could have been possibly avoided if a publication ban had t been imposed in the first place? This is part of how I think bans harm more than help most cases (at least the ones I am aware of their use in).
Let's not forget that the fall of 2023 and spring of 2024 were pretty eventful months with some very unusual stuff going on in this case.
the state may have not decided to rush out and waste their resources hiring an expert that may not be needed because suddenly the court and this entire case were mired in the drama that ensued both out of court and in over the leaked photos, the DT's brief removal from the case and the subsequent SCOIN filing. Had the DT STAYED fired, we don't know that a new DT would be pursuing the same theory the DT wasted so much time and effort on. JMO
But that did not happen, DT was back in the game and right back to filing their littlemotionspress releases to the public about SODDI and runes so then the state had to address it because DT was asking the judge to allow them to make their argument before the jury about it. in my mind that is not the state being concerned about their own back ends.
It’s my opinion that Cicero was brought on by the state mainly to support the motion in limine. The MIL was filed in April, which is when Cicero said he began work. The state likely saw that after repeated Franks motions full of half truths and misleading statements that the defense would not be reasonable and they would need to ask the court to specifically restrict certain talking points. A key step towards discrediting the defense’s theory was getting the “rune” on the tree debunked. That’s what Cicero was for. It’s less that they rushed to get something done because they felt exposed, they were probably just tired of having to wade through the ridiculous theories, speculation, and misstatements and decided to just make the defense put their money where their mouths were, so to speak.
For starters, it’s convenient that the defense doesn’t have access to the actual questions and answers, so what we have is effectively paraphrasing. And we don’t even know which of the questions was actually posed, because the defense carefully points out the questions were either asked or would have been asked if Mullins was answering as the defense wished.
