In Session The judge has finished reading a document, and Brodsky now addresses the Court. Dr. Mitchells report, as we talked about a couple of days ago, the original protocol can come in. But we cant call Dr. Mitchell to cross-examine him. [But] Dr. Blums second opinion, so to speak . . . theres no reason that his written opinion should come into evidence and go back with the jury, and ours wont . . . the States asking for an unfair advantage . . . his report should not be admitted into evidence, and should not go back with the jury . . . hes got his opinion before the jury; they dont need the report. Glasgow: Were asking to move this into evidence because the statute allows it . . . were asking that the report be admitted. Judge: Well, what about all of the things in here that he hasnt testified about? Its replete with information. What is the relevance that she had two children, or that she has a rosary in her hands when he first saw the body? Glasgow: I guess we could redact that . . . well present a redacted copy to Your Honor. Judge: If the State isnt going to ask that it go back to the jury, the defendants objection is overruled . . . but whether this would be substantive evidence that would ever go back to the jury, thats a different issue altogether . . . that extraneous information must be removed.
lease: I just hope this jury gets it !
