RSBM
I do wonder what the appellate lawyers will make of Rozzi and Baldwin's botched Safekeeping hearing.
Let's consider a key dynamic on appeal. IMO so long as the confessions hold, you will struggle to get a new trial even if Judge Gull made other legal errors (e.g on 3rd party). The reason is because the jury heard all the evidence and found him guilty so an appeal court will be slow to disturb the juries findings about the confessions IMO.
The D case now seems to be that the confessions were unreliable, as they were caused by psychosis, which in turn was caused by the unfair prison conditions. There are a few avenues of attack here - but lets pick at one
It seems problematic that Baldwin & Rozzi
- missed the opportunity to move for a safekeeping hearing for months - seemingly only acting when their client confessed
- made submissions the judge found to be dishonest
- failed to make any pleadings on psychosis with medical/expert basis so the Judge simply did not know this in '23
- were held by the Judge to have been negligent in their representation
- instead made submissions that the confessions were caused by odinist prison guards
Pre trial, Rozzi changed tack, opened up the medical evidence, but also seemed to rely on an uncomfortable argument that the confessions were coerced by agents of the state
So I am left wondering if one chance is to argue Baldwin & Rozzi botched the safekeeping. Personally i believe their representation was poor in this regard. Of course they had a weak hand thanks to their client confessing to all an sundry. But the appellate lawyers can point to on the record findings of dishonesty and negligence wrt the safekeeping hearing.
MOO