elementary
No More Excuses
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 3,077
- Reaction score
- 1
Initially, O'Mara had no idea what that evidence was or would say. He had to preemptively at least ask (even knowing he would likely be turned down) to prevent its release if possible in the event is was damning for his client. I think that is every defense attorney's worst nightmare, having a client plead innocence, believing it, and then getting hit with an airtight case.
There is no legitimate public or judicial interest served however by the Prosecution withholding evidence. While I certainly understand the redaction of witness information in a case like this, the VSA results, the Full Toxicology Panel and everything else should be released. My concern is, they are trying to hold it back for fear of "social upheaval" which should never be a consideration in American Jurisprudence.
Sad to say that I take such a dim view on this, but the Crump + FL Prosecution strategy seems to be just to try and get past the SYG hearing. If the Judge kills it there, George is indemnified from Civil Claims as a result of his action. I think that is what this whole thing has been about since Day 1. Corey knows she cannot get a murder 2 conviction, but by overcharging, I think it was believed to quell any upheaval and help pass the SYG Hearing. Overcharging is prosecutorial misconduct.
Actually and factually, Prosecution is not "withholding" evidence. Prosecution is asking that certain evidence be sealed for fear of tainting the jury pool (even further, IMO). Withholding evidence would mean that the defence wasn't getting all the discovery. As far as we know that is not true.