Delaying delivery of discovery limits the preparation timeline for the other side. It is a known tactic and why it's a big deal, intentional or not, a pattern of delay will get big penalties.
This is what I'm challenging.
Just because Iris said it, and just because the judge regurgitated it, IMO doesn't make it true.
Only truth makes it true.
Iris convinced the first judge that the Prosecution withheld DNA that was exculpatory. They did not and it was not.
Iris convinced the second judge that a dog picked up Suzanne's scent by the bike and followed it. Not true, not exculpatory.
IMO furthermore, neither interfered with Barry's right to a fair trial.
Never mind that the Prosecution no longer intended to call the handler as a witness. Paring down the 500. Pre-game decision not to call -- and all the handler
would offer
if called is that the dog never located Suzanne's scent -- no hidden evidence! That's bad
for Barry! It doesn't
exonerate him! It
implicates him!
But Iris got the judge to smell the imaginary log.
Iris
invented a livestream breach. Never happened. But the judge believed it, all but boxing out the public's right to be there and the media's ability to report on it.
Iris
invented breaches by the DA. calling her remarks outrageous, prejudicial-- but 1. the DA made her remarks
before any gag orders or admonitions and 2. she
didn't say anything prejudicial! She indicated the fact that the defendant wasn't answering questions and sought an attorney. Fact. Beyond that, she wouldn't discuss particulars of the case. As we'd expect.
Iris is a magician.
JMO
