Yea, I was actually a tad confused about that too. I watched the video a while ago now but thought I remembered him just getting a warning on 14th Oct - no ticket for intersection infraction or whatever in h..l it was; on 21 Aug (corner farm rd and pullman hway moscow) seat belt infraction (per PCA). But it is a job to keep confusion at bay with all these details floating round. V. easy to get confused...! MOO
Thank you! My brain gets foggy, but I didn't know if I should stay confused or start looking for the Aug (seat belt) body cam video. Figured I'd ask before searching, so thank you for answering so quickly
You're welcome, just happenned to be hanging and not doing much as brain is fried from trying to think in legal terms...owing to over familarity, some details of this case (a lot of the time not even useful ones) are seared into my brain.Thank you! My brain gets foggy, but I didn't know if I should stay confused or start looking for the Aug (seat belt) body cam video. Figured I'd ask before searching, so thank you for answering so quickly
MOO Defense is just a game at some point.Given her expertise on eyewitness testimony, I assume that the new attorney, EM, who is now on BK's defense team, will be very interested in DM's description of the person she saw the morning of the murders, and all the details of the physical state, etc. of DM that morning and the night before.
In her appeal regarding the America's Most Wanted Case she represented, nothing was spared in relation to the eyewitness/victim, and also how LE handled the video lineup, etc. The details are described at the link below.
The conviction was overturned on appeal, and the prosecution decided not to hold a new trial. Hard to imagine that this vicious criminal went free.
Home | National Registry of Exonerations
www.law.umich.edu
What do you mean?
IANAL but they incorporated their January and February response in this most recent one. The January response clearly says we have given over everything that is in the state's control. The February response seems to say "See our January response". I take this to mean they have given the defense all they have in their possession and that this is still true today. Now, is it possible PA or WA have not handed everything over? Definitely. Is it possible Idaho ASKED PA or WA to delay providing any documents? I suppose that is possible, although it would certainly be dirty pool and we have absolutely no proof of that, or even any rumor of that. MOOooo
It seems the Defense is looking for something specific. If the prosecution is just continuing to say they have provided everything, then that is that. If PA has provided something, the prosecution must say that, they can't just say "we have given all we have." That is an incomplete answer. If Moscow PD has not given everything to the DA, that is not an honest answer as well. The Defense is setting a path here. They may not be actually wanting something to be produced, but instead establish that something doesn't exist and prevent the State from insinuating later that it does. That state should be careful how it responds. But i still think the Defense is looking for something specific to be produced that the State for some reason has not yet done.
Not sure what you are meaning by posting this. If the State knows of evidence that is requested it must provide it. This sentence is true only as to truly newly discovered evidence. The insinuation that they cannot withhold info until the determine that they want to use it isn't very useful. This paragraph is likely the last paragraph of every single discovery response they send out.
If the Latah County prosecutor doesn't have a report, a product, in any form, is it evidence? When does something become "discoverable"?
From a defense attorney's point of view keeping the system honest is the point.
Well if a party does not have something that it is supposed to have, they can say they don't have it. If they are asked again, they need to explain WHY they don't have it and who does have it.
Having lived here for 35 years, this kind of stop & warning for minor moving violations is common in this area & not just for out-of-state drivers, MOO.
SBMFF
She is very nice. I think what happened here is he pulls into intersection to make a left, waits on traffic, light goes red and he turns. Happens a million times a day. She pulls him over using that as a pretext for a stop. It is a college town, she is looking for drunk drivers. He questions her about it, he is questioning but respectful in my opinion, she is patient and professional as well. She gives him the statute on obstructing an intersections but she knows full well she will never get a citation on that to stand so she just warns. But she seems like a very good officer. Very professional, and patient.
