From the little that can be gleaned from reading Superior Court Minute Entries about the case:
1. The State dropped it's pursuit of the DP almost literally at the last minute. The trial judge denied Grewal's appeal to dismissal the DP on March 29, 2019, after an initial trial date had already been set.
The State filed it's Motion (to drop) the DP on April 23, 2019.
Can't determine from the bare bones docket/Minutes why the State took the DP off the table. It's obvious from the Minutes that Grewal was considered incompetent to stand trial for some length of time. At least from January-end of March 2019, a clinical liason for the State provided the trial judge biweekly reports, presumably on Grewal's mental/psychological status.
The liason's final report to the judge is dated March 21, 8 days BEFORE the judge denied Grewal's motion to dismissal the DP, with no dissent at that time by the State.
2. Grewal's stretch of going per se. Some indication as to what that looked like can be surmised by reading the titles of his Motions.
Examples: Sept 2018: "Motion to Stop the Ongoing Miscarriages of Justice in My Case."
December 2018: "Notice of Filing Unresolved Issues Seeking Your Kind Honors (sic) Attention."
Not sure if still per se or with counsel, of the motions filed in April 2019, one requested that he be allowed to use a pen during trial, and another, that he be allowed to sit BETWEEN! counsel at the defense table.
3. Grewal/his attorney fought a months-long battle to introduce Kaur's history of prescriptions into evidence, over her family's explicit objections, on the basis that they might include exculpatory evidence.
The "evidence" Grewal sought appears to have been based on wishful thinking, a fishing expedition, and a revolting one at that. He argued that the scripts history COULD indicate she had a heart condition, and that IF she was on blood thinners that could explain the amount of blood found at the scene, and that a heart condition COULD have shortened the time it took to strangle her, so she couldn't have suffered for any great length of time. (Motion was ultimately denied).
4. No idea of the significance (or lack of) this, but the judge granted Grewal's motions to completely exclude any statements by ( or even mention of, at any time during trial) two potential witnesses: Ganesh Kodavuru and Sravanthi Sankranthi.
5. Last, the judge just ruled (June 3) against Grewal's motion to introduce evidence relating to the Asperger's & autism spectrum. Perhaps Grewal had hoped to claim a place on the spectrum & less culpability somehow?
Pocket, I wish too that this trial was being streamed, or at very least, that someone, anyone, cared enough to be tweeting throughout.
