Okay, but aren't you relying on the "statements" read by Cheshire from the SBI report provided to him concerning his client/s? Why would the SBI be required to tell him about evidence related to others found on the accuser?
How will it look in court?
So, you admit that you knew all along that CGM had lied to the SANE? You admit that you knew all along that CGM had in fact had sex recently? You admit that you had evidence favoring the defendants and you left that out of the report? You admit that you did not inform the SANE that CGM had in fact had sex recently. Did you ask the SANE if that would change the report?
Doesn't sound good to me.
On the other hand, revealing that the SBI couldn't find DNA even though CGM had sex recently wouldn't look too good either.
I guess I'm thinking that prior to discovery, the DA was only required to tell the defense lawyers about DNA result relating to the lawyers clients. In other words, the defense lawyers initially got only part of the report relating to the team members. After discovery, the defense lawyers were entitled to the entire report.
On the other hand, if the first DNA report came back and the DA knew that Crystal had sex with someone other than a lax team member, why did it take so long for the DA to go out and sample the three guys she named?