She wasn't arrested, why read her the Miranda, 2.the judge under this circumstance has every right to have a court order, in order to keep all gamesmanship out of the trial is within his jurisdiction and certainly keeps the trial timely...3.How was the defense restricted? 4, I missed the overlay, was the jury privy to this?, 5,...They stipulated other decisions that allowed family to be present during previous testimonies, I'll admit this was strange..I won't be surprised if this will be tied up in court for many many years on appeal....I appreciate your insite as an attorney but still question some of your comments but that is what makes the world go 'round! IMHO
In respoinse to the answer to my note on mistrial, appeal reversal: Comments above:
1. As the retired sheriff of Dade/Miami County said she should have been
mirandized the moment they put her in the back seat of a squad car. Further
as Harvard Professor Dershish (Spelling of name?) said when they put her in a room with 2 deputy sheriff's + the Detective and they started to ask questions including the one by the Detective, "Are you going to stay with the story you just told" she had to be Mirandized. She was not and per both this is a serious violation and basis for a mistrial.
2. I was involved in a trial in the Federal Building in NYC when a Federal Judge said to the cross exam attorney that he must provide his questions
ahead of time.The ex US Attorney General who was, sitting next to me said that is cause for a mistrial. The judge realizing he made an error corrected it and said he was only suggesting it and it was not a court order. To illustrate the trick that was played on this..The State did not raise this in a deposition as they wanted to have it testified in court and the expert did. When the defense started to raise a question, the State said it was not in the original opinion submitted by the expert. This was a trick by the State and unfortuntely the Defense walked into it. How could the expert expect to put it in a report if it was not a problem in a deposition. The trick was not by the defense but rather by the State and they got away with it.
3. This is purely subjective but I believe there is a huge imbalance between how many sustained objections he approved for the state vs the defense. I am not sure how strong this is for a mistrial but it appears to be a judicial
leaning to the State. We should remember the Judge was a "Prosecutor"!!!
4. Yes, it was shown to the jury and it was totally out of line since it was
"created evidence" made to look factual.
5. I believe there was a request by the Defense to challenge this in a hearing
and it was rejected.
