AZlawyer
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2008
- Messages
- 7,883
- Reaction score
- 2,123
So basically HHJP has to make a decision solely based on the facts and what he believes was her state of mind at the time?
Based on the facts and the law, yes. Her state of mind is really irrelevant. The question is not how she felt in the situation, but how a "reasonable person" would have felt.
If they go with the accident scenario and she freaked out...will KC have to take the stand?
Nope. The defense can argue any theory that is consistent with the evidence.
If the judge decides to keep Anthony's statements to investigators, out of evidence because of Sheriff's Office misconduct, the state will likely have to drop four counts against her related to lying to deputies, or it could appeal the decision and further delay the trial.
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/27103024/detail.html
AZ, do you know what this means? I can't tell from this article if it's the defense or state that would have to appeal the decision.
The state could appeal such a decision. The defense could not. IMO there will be enough lying kept in to preserve those counts, but I am sure the SA is not terribly worried about it. Those were just the charges to keep her in jail until LE could figure out what the heck happened.
If HHJP does not let the Universal Interview in, what impact would it have on the SAs case?
Hypothetical question reference Universal Interview (UI) not being allowed at trial:
It is trial day, YM is on the stand. While being questioned by the DT, the answer from YM makes reference to the Universal Interview. The DT, for whatever reason, does not stop YM and the Universal Interview is out in the open. Can the SA than ask questions about the UI? OR, will HHJP stop YM and school the DT again?
HHJP would stop everything and decide if any real damage has been done--if so, he would have to declare a mistrial. If not, he could just instruct the jury to disregard that portion of the answer (which in real life acts as a big red flag to jurors: "HEY! Something interesting is being kept secret from you! When you deliberate, you should spend lots of time trying to guess what it was!").
If the defense team actually ASKS something about the Universal interview, I suppose they would have "opened the door" and the SA would be allowed to ask questions to rebut whatever the defense's point was. But IMO this would be raised as part of a later ineffective assistance of counsel claim.