I think there's a hearing today too.
So Sneddon wants to see the defense's cards before the trial so he can twist things around his conspiracy theory. And if Melville plays by the rules (haha yeh right!) anything Sneddon hasn't handed over by today shouldn't be allowed. Another excuse for Melville to show his true colours. :extremelyOriginally posted by elusive moonwalker on MJJForum
discussion of the dicovery motion sneddon filed to get access to defence evidence. the law is the defence doesnt have to hand anything over until 30 dats b4 trial. also sneddon handing over discovery to the defence is to be discussed.sneddon was supposed to hand over everything on friday just gone. anything that wasnt handed over by then would be ruled inadmissable.
He thinks Mez has inculpatory evidence, thats why he filed that Sanchez motion. That motion was denied. so now i have no idea what foundation (in a legal standpoint) they are basing this request over. My guess is taht they motioning for Melville to reconsider?Well if the law states that it's only allowed for the Procecuters to recieve the evidence from the defense team into 30 days before the trial..Then why is he filing a motion
He thinks Mez has inculpatory evidence, thats why he filed that Sanchez motion. That motion was denied. so now i have no idea what foundation (in a legal standpoint) they are basing this request over. My guess is taht they motioning for Melville to reconsider?
I really don't understand this... Who's Melville saying no to? Mez or Sneddon?Originally posted by whisper
Q. Also, did Melville rule about the first issue in which the defense wanted about the family's first testimony (emails, correspondence, etc.), which Sneddon is claiming as work product?
A. I should've been more clear on this one...
the different correspondences, etc, were not necessarily of things the family directly said. I'm sure the defense has anything the family testified about. It's more specific than that...
Ie:
--interoffice/intraoffice memos. Melville: ? dunno ruling?
--unspecified tapes I think relating to the DCPS/DSS (dept social services) that the defense wanted transcripts of. sneddon said they shouldn't be accountable for making transcripts of everything they have. Melville's Ruling: no
--email communications: email communications between I THINK sheriffs, people in the DA's office, detectives, etc. Melville: No.
--all notes of witnesses that they take with them during their testimony. Melville: yes
--correspondence to other agencies Melv - dunno ruling
--list of names of prosecutors that have reviewed the case. melville - no
--prosecution charge evaluation sheets. mel- no.
They argued because sneddon said the demands were "overbroad" and that the defense blended 1054.1 and Brady material. I just know that they both have to do with handing over evidence. Brady refers to items of work-product/privilage having to be handed over if exculpatory.