Actually, this is a fundamental question. If they can't release a redacted PC then what's the real reason they are holding back?
Ultimately, if he is guilty and there is a co-conspirator, the co-conspirator knows RA has been arrested and probably know the evidence better than the cops. The fact of his arrest would be the only tipoff they'd need.
Perhaps I've spent too much time in a world where people classify documents to hide embarrassing secrets (think Pentagon Papers) but I would not put it past them to hide the PC because it's thin
I think you are missing the point of the rhetorical flourish. I am saying, in response to a comment specifically about the judge signing off on the PC and having a good reason, that we do not know what said good reason is.
Side note: Have you ever heard that phrase about a prosecutor being able to indict a ham sandwich?
Nonetheless, it's the cops job, the prosecutor's job, the judge's job and eventually the jury's job and then the job of appeallate courts. The defendant gets a swing at it and so do their attorneys. The press and the public get a vote -- although outside the judicial system -- too
First let me thank you for all of the civics lessons! You have me waxing nostalgic for my junior year in high school.
I would like to see the probable cause affidavit released due to insatiable curiosity, but it is difficult to argue that the public has a compelling need to see it immediately. It will be public eventually; of that there is no doubt.
I don't know what the reason is for sealing the affidavit, but I can think of a few legitimate reasons.
First of all, it will be very difficult to seat a jury for this case. This is basically the crime of the century in Indiana. Releasing the PCA right now would lead to even even more news coverage and would taint the jury pool even further. It is highly likely that all of the publicity surrounding this case will lead to a change of venue, but perhaps the prosecution is hoping to avoid that.
Second, the PCA may contain the names of people who have provided incriminating information against RA, and even if those names are redacted, it is possible that their identities would be easy enough to figure out based on the nature of the information provided. The prosecutors may wish to protect those witnesses from being harassed by the media and by citizen-sleuths.
Third, LE has stated that several signatures were present at the crime scene. There may be information about those signatures in the PCA, and that information might connect RA to other murders that are still being investigated. RA seems to have the motivations of a serial killer, and he would be an extreme outlier if he started his career with a double murder at age 45.
In short, sealing the PCA was probably motivated by a desire to prevent the media from wreaking havoc with the adjudication of this case or other cases.
www.google.com
