2011.06.23 TRIAL Day Twenty-six (Afternoon Session)

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
ami said:
It's true. Unless their paper is specifically a methods paper (one that describes a new method) or they haven't done anything beyond well-referenced methods, there's almost always something summarized for brevity that could be further explained. And actually I've even had to contact authors of methods papers come to think of it. It's rare and perhaps impossible to get a complete 'users manual' in a publication.
Click to expand...

Absolutely! There is always something to ask about or to clarify. Journal space is precious. The authors put in everything they can, but some things don't make the cut. And in my experience, everyone I've contacted in this situation, even our competitors, promptly responded and were helpful because they understand this.
 
I don't know how HHJP does it! The man is a solid rock of fortitude and patience! He's trying his best to clean up the DT mistakes so that the trial can continue fair and square.
 
So did DS make the mistake and JA compound it? I don't understand what the specific problem is?
 
Maybe Ashton should have pulled out a wrinkled memo pad, stuck it on an easel and drawn some pictures of cans (and labeled them "CANNS") and then pointed to them to question the witness.
 
If I were on the witness stand, and JA slammed those cans in front of me like that, I'd be intimidated & possibly fearful.
 
liltexans said:
Judge O.H. Eaton Jr. says he believes a curative instruction to the jury should be enough to repair the problem. No mistrial.
by Jeff Cousins/WESH.com at 1:31 PM

Our legal expert Judge O.H. Eaton doubts a mistrial will happen.
by Jessica Steck/WESH.com at 1:30 PM
Click to expand...

For once, I'm glad to hear from Judge E.

I've been thinking about how ICA wrote to her pal that JB said it would end in a mistrial. Did he not explain that she would have to stay in jail and it would be a do-over? :waitasec: I think she thought she could walk away if a mistrial is declared.
 
Anyway you look at it, the jurors heard the final question.
No way to erase that now....yehaaaaaaa
 
The DT's game is to get a mistrial because they fracked up royally and need to start fresh, and HHJP is on to them and trying his hardest to prevent that.

Is it possible for HHJP to do something about this without calling for a mistrial?
 
RSDhoping for a cure said:
I understand that the "burden of proof" is the states responsibility but could someone explain to me how the DT can throw things out there without having to PROVE the theory their witness is testifying to.

I hope this question makes sense, it did in my head but not sure it came out the same way!
Click to expand...

Makes sense to me. But the problem is that the DT has NO burden of proof and is not required to do any testing.
 
ami said:
Maybe Ashton should have pulled out a wrinkled memo pad, stuck it on an easel and drawn some pictures of cans (and labeled them "CANNS") and then pointed to them to question the witness.
Click to expand...
:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh: Too flipping funny
 
The defense is trying to impeach Dr. Vass so how is it fair that the prosecution can't question the defense "expert" on whether or not he could've done the testing. I don't get it.
 
pcrum12 said:
Burden of Proof shifting to Defense. In criminal law the defense does not have to do anything to include testing, witnesses anything and it can't be used against them for the burden lies solely on the Prosecution.

ETA: When JA asked the witness if he had seen any of the cans and he said no JA then asked if the DT had asked him to test it or if he had tested it - giving jury impression that the defense should have and yet law says they don't have to.

Okay now I'm confusing myself lol.
Click to expand...

The DT (per Sims) asked "could you replicate this test?"....opening up the line of questions from JA about did you? Why not? It boils down to the same thing we had the other day about the dna evidence. The DT never sent it, they never asked that this test be replicated, because of what it MIGHT prove against their client. And they didn't have to do that. That would be putting the burden on them to show their client DID NOT DO IT. In a criminal trial, the burden lies with they Prosecution in showing she DID DO IT.
 
grandmaj said:
Simms went to far and now the Judge is trying to save the trial. She should not have gone down that road and once again they can violate rules of the procedure and then demand remedy.
Click to expand...

So are you saying it's ok that JA does? JA knows very well that Defendant has no burden to test anything - that question was to inflame the fury with Inference that they had to or should have.
 
JA is showing that he does have great faith in Dr Vass and his techniques and findings. JA gets credit for bringing DNA into FL courtrooms and he is a perfectionist about dotting his i’s and crossing his t’s. This gives me great faith in these findings.
 
grandmaj said:
Simms went to far and now the Judge is trying to save the trial. She should not have gone down that road and once again they can violate rules of the procedure and then demand remedy.
Click to expand...

I bet the jury hates the defense for this. They are DEMANDING a mistrial...by their own actions. It screams of this. :banghead:

Like I said before, when someone has the upper hand, break it.
 
ami said:
Maybe Ashton should have pulled out a wrinkled memo pad, stuck it on an easel and drawn some pictures of cans (and labeled them "CANNS") and then pointed to them to question the witness.
Click to expand...

:floorlaugh:
 
Steely Dan said:
The talking heads on Wesh just said that the defense may have opened the door to switching the burden of proof from the state to the defense and it could be very close to a mistrial.

:gasp:

Please someone fill me in on this. I miss one half hour and it could be the most important half hour of the trial.
Click to expand...

Witness was asked if he is able to replicate Dr. Vass's results, and JA thinks it opened the door for him to ask why he didn't try. DS objects because it shifts the burden of proof to the defense implying that they should have run the tests and she was just trying to point out that the tests were run according to no protocol the witness is aware of and the reports give insufficient information to replicate.

Judge saying that it's a fine line here and let's recess.

The parties quoted caselaw, Overton and Hayes I think.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 165 more.
Total: 4,543 (members: 166, guests: 4,377)

Online statistics

Members online
166
Guests online
4,377
Total visitors
4,543
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,424
Messages
17,968,638
Members
228,766
Latest member
CoRo
Back
Top