for the sake of reasonable doubt…vroom-vroom! - andrea

April 19, 2011 · 8:48 pm
for the sake of reasonable doubt…vroom-vroom!

Excerpt:

An interesting Defense motion (click to read), was released today in which the Defense, in the State v. Casey Anthony case, maintains that, in the name of reasonable doubt, the Court should allow the Defense to proffer, at trial, Anthony’s statements to Drs. Danziger and Weitz, mental health experts who recently examined her.

The Defense argues that the contents of these mental health reports include statements from Casey Anthony, that support their theory of reasonable doubt, and therefore should be admissible at trial.

When a defense can offer evidence to support its theory of the case – and it tends to support its claims of reasonable doubt – the Court usually finds it admissible, as courts never want to inhibit evidence that tends to support reasonable doubt. When the court rules against such proffers of testimony or evidence from the defense, it can be construed as error by an Appeals Court.

HOWEVER…. This situation is completely different. This is testimony from expert witnesses that the defense wants to use IN PLACE of Anthony’s testimony. Furthermore, the State had the opportunity to depose these experts, but the defense pulled these witnesses from their case, and the State deposition was halted (presumably something unfavorable to the defense was revealed – we do not know what). The State may have learned of information that would benefit them, and/or the defense heard testimony that would harm their case, though it’s not clear what transpired.

READ MORE: http://andreadreamin.com/2011/04/19/for-the-sake-of-reasonable-doubt-vroom-vroom/