the State filed this Discovery Disclosure yesterday
https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR22-20-838/Discovery Disclosure.pdf
outlining that whatever they've had or gathered so far has been turned over already or has been turned over now to them. I think filing can allow one to reasonably assume that the State was just sitting on mountains of evidence & had only given the Defense a fraction of what they had. If that is true, I go back to my previous comment about how the case may really not be that strong and that is why we have not seen more charges come yet.
I know many of the legal minds here have given their input and still many think it is a matter of time, that more charges are coming. Personally I’ve had a hard time deciding what to believe. With the most recent Motion to Disqualify, I thought we saw a lot of divergent opinions there. On CourtTV experienced prosecutors and defense attorneys said Wood’s conduct was basic “law 101” stuff and it was clearly pushing boundaries on ethical conduct. Scott Reisch continually said there was nothing wrong with the conduct and that in fact it would be Means or Prior who’d be in hot water from the Bar association before Woods would. The experienced attorney Lori Hellis who runs a website & publishes a newsletter on this case thought that Wood wouldn’t be removed and it wasn’t misconduct. Law & Crime reporters seemed to have a mix of both. Surely this wasn’t the first time many attorneys have different opinions on the same thing, and it won’t be the last either; but it was interesting to see all the differing opinions, starkly different, about Wood’s conduct. And for that reason, among others, I don’t know what to think about if more charges will ever come, I hope so....but this filing makes it appear that the Defense already has had most if not all of materials and statements to be used by the State.