Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Cboldt
But even taken at face value, I don't see it helping the prosecution.

I don't either. So then why release it. No one knew Sybrina had it. It's not addressed to her. This could have easily been dropped in the round file or filed away and it would have never been missed.

So why dredge it up and dredge it up now at a time when Witness 8 is about to be unmasked???

27 posted on 03/29/2013 1:31:17 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: Uncle Chip
-- So why dredge it up and dredge it up now at a time when Witness 8 is about to be unmasked? --

Bernardo coughed up the letter the same day that O'Mara was scheduled to depose Witness 8. I think Bernardo was covering the contingency of O'Mara asking Witness 8 if she ever wrote down her recollection, and any follow up questions.

28 posted on 03/29/2013 1:35:12 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Uncle Chip

In my unhappy experience, subpoena’s commonly require the witness to bring and produce at the depo all relevant documents in their possession. Sounds like the defense got it at Sybrina’s 3-15-13 depo, from Sybrina. On 3-27-13, BdlR provided it as discovery material, AS IF, he also had first received it recently, and already provided it once on 3-15-13. Question is, when did the State really first have it?


30 posted on 03/29/2013 1:55:49 PM PDT by Chewbarkah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson