PROFFER of ERIC EDWARDS BY CM:
He met Linda Tinelli through the investigation. She was brought to his attention by Lauri Kree (sp) that was a volunteer for TES about the time of December when they visited TES. While he wsa there he received a phone call from Lauri Kree and she told him that Linda Tinelli was a volunteer at the Kid Finders' Tent.
John Allen and he interviewed her. He thinks she was in charge of maintaining the volunteer sheet.
He showed her a photo of an image of duct tape. He believes that Lauri told him that Linda brought to her attention that GA had brought duct tape to the tent.
He showed a photo or video capture of a missing flyer with tape.
She didn't specifically say that was the tape, but described a strong tape.
After the remains were found, did you contact Ms. Tinnelli? Needs his memory refreshed. There was another time he and John Allen contacted her again due to correspondence with the A's.
He went to her home around 3/09. Did you discuss placing a bug on the lamp in her living room? The A's were asking to meet with her and he believes she had visited the A's and told them that she had met with OCSO and she had been receiving communications from them and he wanted to capture her conversation with them. Did she decline? He doesn't recall. He does recall that she wanted to get her husband's permission and she thought that might have been too intrusive. She didn't say no. It was never done.
He contacted her a third time at Lowe's. He and John Allen - they may asked her if she would wear a wire on her person so that she could capture conversations with the A's. She did not do that. The window of opportunity never made itself available.
End of proffer.
No questions by LDB on the proffer.
CM - Are you aware of any voice mails on her phone. Ms. Tinnelli allowed him to listen to a voice mail left by CA. He would like to review a transcript before commenting further. John Allen had a transcript he believes.
HHJBP - what material facts does this evidence tend to prove or disprove or what relevance does this have to the theory of the defense?
CM - how much time do I have. This reveals that the focus of the investigation was directed at ICA. Can't establish material fact without the recording.
HHJBP - what relevance?
CM - The theory of defense deals with the dysfunctionality and the circumstances of what happened after the drowning and who did what.
HHJBP - Were they able to get the incriminating statements?
CM - No sir.
HHJBP - State?
LDB - It is obvious that this line of questioning is designed to invite the jury to speculate on the motives of law enforcement because their motivation would be irrelevant because they don't deal with the guilt or innocence of ICA. No evidence was obtained and therefore, the only thing left is the motivation and that is not relevant or material for the jury to consider.
CM - It is interesting based on speculations when we are asked to speculate as to the murder weapon being duct tape.
HHJBP - I think I have enough experience to understand what goes to an argument. In Wright v State it is the trial court's discretion to determine what is relevant. It is quite evident by the proffer that this evidence does not go to proving a material fact. The second possibility is its admissibility under the theory of the defense. The theory advanced at this time is that the victim died of an accidental drowning and the different behavior of the defendant after this event was caused by certain events - this does not go toward this theory. The objection is SUSTAINED and IS NOT ADMISSIBLE or for the theory of defense.
No further questions of the detective.
Witness excused (3:57)
CM still wishes to call Ms. Tinnelli.
HHJB - doesn't want to send the jury back out on the POP TART ROUTE
