The motions below are scheduled to be heard today (click titles to read text of motions). In addition, there was another motion to be heard at 8:45 this morning, but it didn't pan out. Judge Perry was not happy that start time was delayed. Court instead began with WFTV's motion (granted), then moved on to continuance of testimony on the Defense Motion to Suppress Statements of Anthony Family et al.
Det. Yuri Melich was called by the defense. Jose Baez tried very hard to get Melich to admit that Casey was a suspect right off the bat in the investigation. Melich says he lied to her when saying things she'd told him when he took her statement were suspicious. This is a police tactic to elicit information. He said he considered her the mother of a missing child, not a suspect.
Melich also testified on cross that the Anthonys were relentless in insisting that somebody go talk to Casey. He said he repeatedly told them that unless she reached out to them, LE couldn't talk to her because she was represented by counsel. LE told them that if Casey reached out, either with or without her attorney, then they could talk to her. Melich denied Baez's assertion that he "constantly encouraged" members of the Anthony family to question Casey and feed answers to LE.
Sgt. John Allen was recalled to the stand to complete his testimony. He also denied that he "constantly encouraged" the Anthony family to question Casey outside the presence of her attorney. George Anthony made faces and shook his head in disagreement with Allen the entire time. If I were he, I would heed the judge's warning yesterday that there was to be no gesturing, talking, faces in the gallery. This judge means business.
When Burdick finished cross of Allen, Judge Perry asked if Baez had any further questions. Baez responded, "No, Judge, we'll just let the record...." Objection by Burdick to editorializing by Baez. Judge Perry gave a very stern warning that there would be no editorializing by either side. He said the attorneys didn't want to know what would happen if they disobeyed that order. I think it's the first time I've heard him raise his voice that way. He was hot under the collar!
WFTV has filed a motion to strike its reporter, Kathy Belich, from the defense's Supplemental Witness List and has noticed the motion for hearing on March 3rd.
Result: Motion to Quash Subpoena for Kathy Belich was granted. Judge ruled that the defense did not overcome the burden of the three-pronged test for reporter privilege exception.
The state contends that the defense filed its supplemental witness list outside the time frame ordered by the court and failed to show good cause for having done so. On the court's own motion, the defense is given the opportunity to show good cause for failing to comply with the court's order.
Result: Defense agreed to remove the attorney from NY (Marvin Schecter) from the witness list. Kathy Belich was removed via the judge's granting of motion to quash her subpoena this morning. State agrees that defense showed good cause in their response for late filing of third witness, Kenneth Drupiewski.
State's Motion To Strike Defense Motion To Exclude Chloroform
The state contends that the defense's motion to exclude chloroform evidence pursuant to Frye is insufficient and should be stricken. First, the evidence isn't subject to Frye because the means of testing (gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer) are routinely accepted; secondly, the defense didn't support its motion with authorities.
State's Motion To Strike Defense Motion To Exclude Chloroform
The state contends that the defense's motion to exclude chloroform evidence pursuant to Frye is insufficient and should be stricken. First, the evidence isn't subject to Frye because the means of testing (gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer) are routinely accepted; secondly, the defense didn't support its motion with authorities.
*A note about Frye: Florida uses the Frye standard when there is a challenge to evidence as "novel" or outside the generally accepted scientific norms. The original case (US vs. Frye, way back in 1923) involved a defendant who wished to present results of his lie detector test to help prove he didn't commit a murder. The court ruled the results inadmissible since the technique wasn't based on generally accepted scientific principles. Scientific evidence must fall within the parameters of "generally accepted" within its field. On the other hand, "pure opinion" testimony (based on the personal observation and experience of an expert witness -- and not on scientific principles) is not subject to the Frye test.
Result: As I understood it, the defense argued that the trace amounts of chloroform found cannot yield reliable scientific conclusions and is therefore subject to Frye. The state argued that it is generally accepted practice. Judge will reserve ruling on this motion for now. Update: State's Motion DENIED by Judge Perry's Order signed 18 March. The chloroform evidence will be subject to Frye hearing.
The state contends that the defense's motion to exclude plant and root growth evidence from Dr. David Hall is legally insufficient in that the testimony will be "pure opinion" as opposed to novel science and, as such, is not subject to the Frye test.
Result: The defense does not admit that Hall's evidence is "pure opinion" testimony; they believe he conducted "novel" type experiments and that his evidence is subject to Frye. The state denies he conducted experiments. The judge will reserve ruling on this motion for now. Update: State's Motion GRANTED by Judge Perry's Order signed 18 March. This doctor's testimony will not be subject to Frye hearings.
The state contends that the defense failed to comply with a court order to list, by February 17, all issues the defense would be objecting to in accordance with Frye. The defense claims "confusion" over the court's order. The state wants defense counsel Jose Baez to show cause why he should not be held in contempt for failing to comply with the court's order.
Judge Perry offered very eloquent commentary about the justice system and thanked the parties for doing as he asked to resolve the matter. He told them that he realized both sides were passionate and that from time to time, that passion would surface. When it does, it's his job to constrain them, he said. He was very happy the parties worked things out and lauded their common decency in doing so.
I think the world of this judge. He is fair and considerate to everyone, but he does not suffer fools or shenanigans in his courtroom -- and no one is ever gonna pull one over on him. When he says something, he means it. You can bank on it. He is always prepared, always several steps ahead of everyone else. There couldn't have been a better choice of judge to oversee this particular trial.
Just a reminder that I try to be as accurate as possible, but if I've missed something or made an error, please feel free to leave a comment so I may correct. Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment