Friday
Verified Author
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,761
- Reaction score
- 0
Sundance's post in another topic reminded me that Judge Strickland had decided to seal the Jail Videotape of Casey's reaction on Dec 11th when she saw a TV newscast about the discovery of human remains on Suburban Drive.
In Judge Strickland's ruling, he admitted he was "loathe to shield any public record," however he felt that potential jurors might see the inflammatory video and "develop a hardened arttitude about the defedant's guilt."
Since the trial is over now, Judge Strickland's reason for sealing that video tape no longer exists. I don't know about everyone else, but I would really, really like to see that video tape and to have it made public where everyone can see it, especially the jurors who decided ICA was not guilty without reviewing any of the evidence or trying to rely on their common sense.
Here are snips from Judge Strictland's ruling, copied (with gratitude) from Sundance's post:
"Being duly advised in the premises, the defendant's duly advised in the premises, the defendant's Motion to Seal the Jail Videotape in question is granted. In taking this unusual step the Court has read and considered the pleadings of all parties, and personally viewed the videotape in question.
While the Court is loathe to shield any public record, an argument can certainly be made that the contents of the video are highly iin nflammatory....
"Given the nature and scope of the pretrial publicity, it is not unreasonable to assume that many persons in the potential jury pool might view this video and develop a "hardened" attitude in reference to the defendant's guilt."
Does anyone else have suggestions about items of sealed evidence that could or should be unsealed now, under the Sunshine Law? If we can put a list together, we might be able to interest someone like Kathy Belich in filing the appropriate paperwork. Or maybe someone here knows how?
First, let's see what we come up with. Suggestions, please. :waiting:
In Judge Strickland's ruling, he admitted he was "loathe to shield any public record," however he felt that potential jurors might see the inflammatory video and "develop a hardened arttitude about the defedant's guilt."
Since the trial is over now, Judge Strickland's reason for sealing that video tape no longer exists. I don't know about everyone else, but I would really, really like to see that video tape and to have it made public where everyone can see it, especially the jurors who decided ICA was not guilty without reviewing any of the evidence or trying to rely on their common sense.
Here are snips from Judge Strictland's ruling, copied (with gratitude) from Sundance's post:
"Being duly advised in the premises, the defendant's duly advised in the premises, the defendant's Motion to Seal the Jail Videotape in question is granted. In taking this unusual step the Court has read and considered the pleadings of all parties, and personally viewed the videotape in question.
While the Court is loathe to shield any public record, an argument can certainly be made that the contents of the video are highly iin nflammatory....
"Given the nature and scope of the pretrial publicity, it is not unreasonable to assume that many persons in the potential jury pool might view this video and develop a "hardened" attitude in reference to the defendant's guilt."
Does anyone else have suggestions about items of sealed evidence that could or should be unsealed now, under the Sunshine Law? If we can put a list together, we might be able to interest someone like Kathy Belich in filing the appropriate paperwork. Or maybe someone here knows how?
First, let's see what we come up with. Suggestions, please. :waiting:
