GatorFL
Well-Known Member
I am not arguing with what you are saying. But how many cases in this country have the DA or defense not meeting deadlines? And how many get by with it, repeatedly? Enough to make ones head swim.
I question the judge’s decision to strip the DA of the expert witnesses as a sanction against her, knowing BM to be a murderer. I am guessing both judges will agree they believe him to be guilty. They are siding with the defense in saying “Prove it”. Then Judge L said the witnesses could not testify, and therefore the DA had no chance to prove it.
To me, that stinks more than what the defense came up with and more than how many times the DA messed up. Just my opinion. And I wont change my mid.
I don't know how often it happens but in trials I have watched in the past, sanctions on both sides are pretty common. I say that anecdotally with no actual statistics on how often it happens.
IANAL or a judge but I am guessing a judge must moderate the trial from a place of innocence, right? So he couldn't strip expert witnesses knowing Barry to be a murderer because until he's convicted of such, he's assumed to be innocent.
I also know that, sadly, many people are wrongfully convicted of serious crimes by rogue and runaway prosecutors. I think having an impartial judge moderating them and the defense is an inherently good thing for the trial process.