Why should their be any question as to whether or not the defense should have access to a critical piece of evidence?
I have always believed, the shooter is probably guilty, (though we should wait until all the evidence is presented) but providing evidence like this to the defense should be totally routine. Makes me wonder if their is something in the video that the prosecution does not want the defense and the public to see.
Are you trying to say that maybe the ex-LEO's story doesn't match the video? What are you going to believe? Your lying eyes or the "word" of an Ex-LEO? Surveillance videos in Dallas have proven LEO reports to be false several times in the last year.
I figure we’ll find out video details soon. Meanwhile, agree the prosecution resisting turning over state’s evidence smells like spoiled fish.
One would think that would fall under normal discovery. The defense should be allowed to view the video under supervision of the court and then provided with a copy for use in developing their defense. I don’t see why their would be a question about this.