http://www.drphil.com/slideshows/slideshow/6841/?id=6841&showID=1975
State of Florida Response to Comments Made by John Bradley
Below is the state of Florida's response to statements made by Mr. John Bradley, designer of the software CacheBack, in a July 19, 2011 New York Times article:
Two software programs were used for conducting computer analysis of searches completed during the Anthony trial. The results produced by CacheBack returned results of 84 visits. The second program, Net Analysis, returned results of one visit. After the results were mentioned in court on June 23, Mr. Bradley contacted the State the same day. He consulted as to a potential rebuttal to the defense regarding the error in his program and recommended using Net Analysis findings. All findings had previously been supplied to the defense in discovery. On June 27, the discrepancy was discussed with Mr. Baez, and both he and the prosecution agreed to use the Net Analysis return of one site visit count as the most accurate information available at the time. If additional information became available, the State agreed to disclose. Mr. Baez brought the discrepancy forward in court testimony and again at closing with his exhibit. During jury deliberations Mr. Bradley admitted to sending additional information to the wrong email address but was able to deliver information to prosecutors on the evening of July 4. On July 5, prosecutors prepared a Notice of Supplemental Discovery for defense, but it was never provided because the jury had reached their verdict.
Mr. Bradley never told prosecutors that the searches or the dates and times of the searches were inaccurate. The only inaccuracies discussed were the visit counts discrepancy and that each software program (CacheBack and Net Analysis) revealed a different number of total records.
Again, all of this information was disclosed to the defense in a timely manner.
We are dismayed at the suggestion made by the defense that prosecutors would withhold exculpatory material. Court records show that the defense was completely aware of the issues, utilizing these facts at trial.