Which seems a little unfair. If the state feels something is invalid he's told to handle it on cross and disprove it in front of the jury. If the defense does, with intention of hiding something, instead of telling them the same Juan is told he can't bring it up at all, which severely limits his ability to make an effective argument. Couldn't the judge have let Juan question them about the working copy and leave it up to Nurmi to let the jury know it was a working copy and let the jury decide? It only seems fair. I mean I'm sure there's something in the law about using working copies as evidence and blah blah blah. But the defense used this copy in their motion and it was given to Juan after he requested their copy for his viewing. So now all of a sudden he can't use it? It doesn't make any sense. It's just a convenient out.