the detective wasn't scheduled to testify and wasn't even called specifically so he obviously had not prepared and reviewed anything in anticipation of testimony as one normally would. It is easy enough to have later testimony introduce evidence that he didn't disclose during the bail hearing he wasn't even scheduled to testify at. He purposely called someone NOT prepared to testify and tried to make it look like the state didn't have anything. The state knew he would get bond-they had no dog in the fight and certainly weren't going to go out of their way to bite the hook on MOM's fishing expedition.
If that were the case, the answer is "I don't know"
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Karmady For This Useful Post: