Replies

Well, it is clear that you have no legal knowledge, so let me explain a few things to you.

You said "depositions," not "discovery." If by "discovery," you now mean to say that the defense gets to see the prosecution's witness list, well, that is certainly true but totally irrelevant to this discussion.

The prosecution will not be calling Evancho or the other partygoers as witnesses. The defense will. And they will be subpoenaed. This process is not considered discovery.

Discovery, meaning something formal other than exchanges of witness list and mandatory disclosure from the prosecution to the defense, is almost never done in crimninal cases, and this is especially true for depositions.

I have not "removed" any possibility that the partygoers are liars, just as I would not assume that the bellhop is a liar. The jury will decide whether or not their testimony is to be believed and if so what weight to give it. But to claim that they will not be called to testify is unsupportable and displays ignorance and bias.

Interesting, I say, that you don't think that there is any chance that they did NOT lie. Most interesting.

The defense will. And they will be subpoenaed.

I believe its unlikely they will testify to anything IF such testimony would even be allowed. Again, no one alleged they heard her say she wasn't assaulted.

Interesting, I say, that you don't think that there is any chance that they did NOT lie. Most interesting.

I have never posted any such thing. I only commented that it appears you believe there is no chance they are lying.

The prosecution will not be calling Evancho or the other partygoers as witnesses. The defense will. And they will be subpoenaed. This process is not considered discovery.

If there is any testimony about the party at all, the prosecution most certainly will be calling some party-goers. They will be calling the ones (also quoted in the media) who claimed the conversation never occurred, and/or the ones who claim that the girl talked about the even briefly, and only after being badgered by other party-goers. The fact that there are at least four different versions of what happened at that party is one of the strongest reasons to suspect that there will be no testimony about the party -- it's only marginally relevant (if at all), and the testimony is likely to be contradictory -- a bunch of hearsay generated by teenagers, based largely on whether they like the accuser or not.