IIRC, the grounds for demanding Murphy's recusal fell into Morphew's lap when the CCSO arrested his girlfriend (Darke?) for trespassing at the Puma Path property. It was a very thin case and the DA dismissed it, but not before Eytan's partner arranged for her husband's firm to represent the girlfriend on the charge (Morphew probably paid the fee). Also, Darke had been listed by the DA as a witness against Morphew, and her lawyer agreed to represent her in that capacity. The firm her lawyer worked for was led by Murphy's best friend, providing grounds for recusal. Murphy asked the prosecutors whether they were prepared to remove Darke from the witness list. They declined to do that and he felt that he had no choice but to remove himself. CSC Chief Justice Boatright appointed Lama, not the sharpest tool at his disposal IMO.
Boatright's poor choice for Murphy's replacement may have been just bad luck for the DA, but I tend to agree that Eytan and Nielsen saw the potential to manipulate the conflict before it actually arose. They had to be thrilled when Darke was arrested so early in the case. Chief Judge Murphy hadn't been overly impressed with their arguments, and he was the most experienced criminal trial judge in the district. I don't believe Lama was Eytan's "buddy", they had every reason to believe Morphew's arguments would be received more favorably a less experienced judge than Murphy - and they were right.
It may be - as
@mrjitty said, that the district's judges were already looking for reasons to impose severe sanctions on the DA's office, and that explains why Lama essentially sank the case. I doubt it, because he made no findings of a pattern of discovery violations across cases in the district.
I think his physical pain was a huge distraction. He didn't look forward to several weeks of trial, and he had virtually no experience handling the high-intensity, high-volume defense tactics of E&N. He saw them as better prepared and more competent than the prosecutors, and he went with their arguments. In sum, as former Adams County DA Bob Grant said, he was "played."
I still think Lama's rulings were wrong and eminently appealable. At the time, I was disappointed that Stanley decided to dismiss the case. But like prosecutor Hurlburt and nearly everyone here, I think the case is much stronger with the evidence of Suzanne's remains. I have let go of my issues with Lama. In retrospect, dismissal looks like a brilliant move.
I think all the past motions and rulings will be useful to DA Kelly, but ultimately not a factor in her case. Assuming she avoids misconduct in her own handling of the case, the most serious hurdle she will face is a likely challenge that re-filing violates Morphew's Constitutional and statutory right to a speedy trial. My guess is that murder is an exception to this rule, and that the new evidence will overcome this argument, but off the top I don't know - and the analysis is probably very fact-intensive.
The other challenge she will face is a local judiciary that is utterly lacking in the kind of experience that Judge Murphy brought to this high profile case. IDK how that will play out, but it's definitely a concern.
A grand jury would offer some protection against the kind of combination circus and discovery proceeding that Eytan and Nielsen made of Morphew's preliminary hearing. Assuming that Kelly follows the rules and commits no arguable misconduct within the GJ proceeding, the independent investigative powers of the GJ can mitigate Morphew's arguments of investigative bias. But as someone pointed out, it takes resources to convene and operate a grand jury, and a rural district that's not exactly a resort area may not have those resources. I wonder if the state AG's special prosecutions unit would convene the state grand jury, as they did in the Elijah McClain case?
All MOO. Good discussion, gang!
