I have a few questions for the lawyers.
JB has repeatedly said "You'll see why she is innocent at trial" or some other variation of that mantra. If the defense has exculpatory evidence, aren't they bound by the rules of discovery to turn that over to the prosecution? Is Florida a reciprocal discovery state?
If the defense does have some kind of smoking gun pointing to someone else and can prove KC's innocence, what "tactical" advantage is there to waiting for a trial and letting their client sit in jail for all this time, rather than just getting the actual guilty party arrested and possibly convicted? Aside from discovery, aren't there some kind of ethical boundaries being massacred by JB here in not getting his client released and the charges dismissed?
Can the prosecution attempt to depose KC? I understand it would be her right to claim protection under the 5th Amendment, but can the prosecution get her statements under oath anyway? Would there be any advantage to doing so?
The defense has had a very long time to prepare for this trial, it seems to me. With the indictment being handed down in October of 2008 and the actual trial likely scheduled for October 2010 at this point, what further legal delays might we see to delay this trial? What advantage can there possibly be, other than to just hope everyone associated with the case dies, to further delays?
Regarding the letter from an inmate (being discussed in another thread), would that be considered "hearsay" and not allowed into evidence, or can the defense argue that it "proves" someone else committed the crime?
This is a reciprocal discovery case, because KC has elected to participate in reciprocal discovery. (If a defendant does not elect to participate, they don't get as much information from the state and also don't have to give much (or any?--not sure) information to the state.)
So the defense would have to disclose the witnesses and exhibits they intend to use at trial, plus any statements made by any of their listed witnesses and any expert reports or statements. The way I read the rule (
http://www.cobblawfirm.com/Rules_Discovery.htm), they would have to disclose expert reports and statements whether or not they have listed the experts, but I suspect JB and AL would interpret that part of the rule differently.
However, the defense would not have to disclose their theories, their cross-examination plans, or what they think a witness will say that has not been preserved in a "statement" anywhere. (But the prosecutors could take depositions of the defense witnesses to find out what they know.)
The only tactical advantage to keeping a
clearly innocent client in jail would be to save the win for trial to get media attention.
Which would be unethical. The advantage in delay would be to actually start getting ready for trial, which the defense hasn't really done yet as far as we can tell.
There would be no point in attempting to depose KC as she would take the 5th and not answer anything (like in the civil case filed by ZG).
The letter from the inmate is definitely hearsay. Obviously the defense can "investigate" haha to see if the allegations made in the letter are true and present any "evidence" haha they find at trial.