#eastidahonews #daybell #trial
A hearing was held in Lori Vallow Daybell's Arizona case on Tuesday morning. Daybell argued a series of motions as prosecutors and the judge responded.
Watch the entire hearing in the video player above.
A hearing was held in Lori Vallow Daybell's Arizona case on Tuesday morning. Daybell argued a series of motions as prosecutors and the judge responded.
Watch the entire hearing in the video player above.
Category
😹
FunTranscript
00:00We have a motion to adjourn
00:30this morning. The first thing I want to address is there's been multiple media requests.
00:34I don't know if there's a representative of the media that can address this, but my
00:43question is if there's a single pool camera, is there some sort of agreement or cooperation
00:51between other media outlets to use a single camera?
00:55Your Honor, if I may, Matthew Kelly, I represent Court TV, and our understanding is that yes,
01:01there is a pool arrangement, and Court TV has asked to be the pool for the trials in
01:08this matter. I believe that that request is pending with the PIO. Regardless, the media
01:17that are interested in camera coverage do have a pool arrangement.
01:21Okay. I know that there was, I don't know if it was Court TV or another outlet requested
01:31multiple cameras and a still camera. I'm inclined to just allow a single camera. Do you want
01:40to speak to that?
01:42Yes, Your Honor. Court TV would prefer to have two of its own cameras. One of its own
01:48cameras is perfectly fine. Court TV's equipment is actually smaller than the camera we have
01:54here today and can be operated remotely, so it is much more unobtrusive. Court TV also
02:01has in the past used the feed from one of the cameras here for the webcasting of hearings
02:12for its purposes as well. Court TV will position its camera so that jurors are not in the field
02:19of view and would not use any of these cameras that have a view of the jurors.
02:24All right. Thank you. Is there anyone else here from the media that wants to be heard?
02:30I don't hear any. State, want to take a position?
02:34Yes, Your Honor.
02:35All right. I know the defendant filed an objection. I've read your objection. Do you have anything
02:42you want to add to that?
02:43Yeah, Your Honor. I'd just like to add some case law to that. Shepard v. Maxwell, 337
02:49U.S. United States Supreme Court, Mr. Justice Clark held that failure of the state judge
02:56in murder prosecution to protect defendant from inherently prejudicial publicity, which
03:02saturated the community to control disruptive influences in courtroom, deprived the defendant
03:07of a fair trial consistent with due process. So that and Arizona v. Cheney, which was the
03:15defendant is entitled to fair and impartial trial when publicity pervades court proceedings
03:20to the extent that the proceedings were prejudiced to the defendant. So obviously you read my
03:28objection, so I just wanted to add those on the record.
03:32Your prior attorneys had filed a series of objections to media coverage being or media
03:43being allowed in the courtroom, and I made a prior ruling that was filed back September
03:484th, which was fairly comprehensive. I am inclined to allow one pool camera. I'll issue
03:56an order with more detailed findings later today or tomorrow, but essentially there won't
04:04be any media coverage during the jury selection process, and I'll put the reasons for that
04:10in the order. So that's again, I'll issue a more detailed order later today or tomorrow.
04:21Your Honor, there's also the issue of whether Court TV would be allowed to live stream the
04:27trial, in other words broadcast online in real time. Court TV would prefer to do that.
04:35Are they able to do a one or two minute delay?
04:43Certainly, we can certainly do that. I just want to inform Your Honor, however, that when
04:51we share the footage with the pool, we can't delay that footage. So your order would need
04:58to require that all media receiving the feed delay it by however long you wish to delay it.
05:09And the pool camera would be simultaneously distributing that feed to whatever media requests it?
05:19That's correct. We have the capability to distribute to up to 30 or 40 different media
05:24outlets, so we have plenty of bandwidth to do so.
05:29It's prejudicial.
05:31All right. Thank you.
05:37All right, let's get down to business on some of the...
05:42Your Honor, could I just add that we want to make sure that the cameras aren't going
05:47to be zooming in at any level to get to our notes and the things that are going to be
05:51on the table. I also, previously, what has happened before is that they just have the
05:57camera on my face the entire trial. So I think when the judge is speaking, the judge needs
06:02to be on the camera. When the state is speaking, they need to be on camera. If we can add that
06:07to the order, I think...
06:08All right. Well, my draft already includes that there'll be no zooming in on council
06:13table, anything on council table, or anything being handled, notes or that sort of thing
06:20being handled by any of the parties or the attorneys. As far as what they focus on, they'll
06:26be limited to focusing on the parties, myself, the witness, depending on the witness. I need
06:32to ask the state about that in a second, but they won't be allowed to broadcast any image
06:37of any juror. While I'm on that subject, let me ask the state, are you seeking any sort
06:43of protective order when a named victim testifies?
06:49Not at this time, Your Honor.
06:52Will you let me know if that changes?
06:54Yes, I will.
06:55Do you have the names of your designated victim or victim representatives that might be testifying?
07:04Kay Woodcock is a statutory legal victim and will be testifying.
07:12Is that the only one?
07:14At this time, yes.
07:15Okay.
07:16For this trial, I should say.
07:17For this trial, okay.
07:27Let me ask this, are the parties ready to proceed around March 31st or April 1st?
07:34Yes.
07:35All right, let me ask the state next. Earlier during these proceedings and past hearings,
07:41you indicated you thought the state's case-in-chief would take two weeks.
07:46You requested yesterday to screen for six weeks.
07:50Your Honor, I did say two to three weeks.
07:52Okay.
07:53But I did say that while we had a defense attorney on and not Ms. Vallow herself.
08:02I am familiar with other pro per trials where generally the timelines are in excess of those with a defense attorney assigned.
08:15So in order to ensure that we aren't asking a jury later to stay longer than we pre-screened them,
08:21I believe it would be appropriate to screen them for six weeks.
08:25So now that you're gearing up for trial and maybe have a better idea,
08:30how long do you think your case-in-chief would take with a normal amount of costs?
08:35I know that's hard to estimate.
08:37And again, I would say two to three weeks.
08:41Three weeks?
08:42That would be at the outset of it.
08:49Probably, yeah, two to three weeks.
08:51Okay.
08:54Let me ask Advisory Council, if we do an e-questionnaire,
08:59would you be assisting Ms. Daybell with your laptop in going through the answers that are received?
09:06Yes, Your Honor.
09:07I mean, assuming we do all of that because a lot of times the courts send us back to our office to go through that.
09:12So if we do that here, then yes, of course, she's welcome to use our laptops.
09:16All right.
09:19My plan is to we can do jury selection in the South Court Tower 5C.
09:28I know that the state has requested that the entire trial be held there.
09:34We can't do it.
09:35We can do jury selection there.
09:37I can give you rooms here for your victims and witnesses, as need be,
09:44that are outside this courtroom that we'll have.
09:47We can have them stream in if you want, depending on, I guess, who the witness is or who's back there.
09:54And obviously, Your Honor, I don't know if the public will be attending this or not.
10:00This also is a little different in that even in the mornings, the jury is going to be potentially out here while the court is having morning calendar.
10:08If there's media out there as well.
10:11I'm just trying to protect the integrity of the trial by ensuring that the public, the media,
10:18are not interacting with witnesses at any time while they're out there.
10:24It's difficult when it's a very small hallway and very limited rooms just to put them in.
10:31Obviously, I need a room for the victims that's separate from any witnesses.
10:37Well, we have on this floor six rooms?
10:43Five or six.
10:44Five or six rooms throughout.
10:46We have three right behind this courtroom.
10:49And we can utilize them as need be to ensure that there's no improper contact between media or the public in general and any victims or witnesses.
11:01We can also ensure that the jurors don't have contact.
11:07If that means we bring them up in a separate elevator and have them assemble somewhere else, we can accomplish that.
11:14So my plan will be to do an e-questionnaire, remote questionnaire for the first 200 jurors.
11:26That questionnaire, I need to get a final joint pretrial statement with the list of witnesses to include the names of witnesses in that.
11:37But I'd like to send out a draft to everyone by the end of this week.
11:45Let me bring up my calendar.
11:47I'm going to bring up my calendar.
12:01We probably send that out to the first 200 jurors around next Thursday, March 20th.
12:12Okay, so we can send out that the 24th to the 27th, meaning it would be cut off on the 27th.
12:20The answers to those questionnaires would be emailed to the parties.
12:26That would give the parties the 28th, 29th, 30th, and 31st to go through those answers.
12:35We would meet on the morning of the 1st, discuss who needs to be let go based on those answers.
12:46Also on the morning of the 1st, a number of walk-in jurors that, for whatever reason, don't fill out the questionnaire in advance would come in to the jury room, the jury assembly room that morning and fill out the questionnaire.
13:01So that morning, we'd also deal with those walk-in answers as best we can.
13:10Oh, that's right. I back up.
13:12The initial answers for the remote, we're going to meet on the 31st.
13:15Let those people go.
13:17Whoever we don't let go will be told to report on the afternoon of the 1st.
13:22On the afternoon of the 1st, we'll be dealing with the walk-ins that come in the morning of the 1st.
13:29And the people that we haven't let go the afternoon of the 1st will be in-person for the year as needed.
13:42If we need to, which I anticipate we probably will, we'll do another 200 jurors on the 2nd.
13:51And if need be, we have another 100 jurors on the 3rd.
13:56That next set of 200, would that be, that wouldn't be a remote?
14:01They don't have a capability to do it remote.
14:03So we may have to...
14:08What will happen is on the 1st, all those people, after they give their answers, will be randomized.
14:16The list will be re-randomized.
14:19As we proceed through the 2nd, those people get added onto the bottom of the list.
14:22So as soon as we get 12 jurors that qualify, that everyone's happy with, that don't have issues,
14:30plus probably 3 or 4 alternates.
14:34So as soon as we get to about 15 or 16, we're pretty much done with jury selection.
14:39So we don't have to necessarily question all 200 of those people.
14:43We can do panels of 20 or something like that.
14:47I anticipate losing quite a large number of people just based on prior media coverage
14:55and people already having some sort of opinion about the case.
14:59I normally wouldn't include a defendant's name in the e-questionnaire that goes out remotely,
15:06but on this case, I'm inclined to, just because that's what we want to know.
15:11We want to know if people have heard about the defendant
15:14and whether or not they've formed an opinion about her or this case prior to them.
15:21Does anyone have an issue with that state?
15:24No, Your Honor. I think that that's a good idea.
15:26That's going to be at least one of the initial reasons to strike a lot of jurors.
15:34My only issue with it, Your Honor, is that it could be bad both ways, right?
15:39If you put the name in there, if you don't put the name in there.
15:42It's been my experience that people will say they haven't heard when they know who that really is
15:48and there's people that will want to be on this jury just for this purpose.
15:55It's going to be complicated.
15:56All the research indicates that these e-questionnaires,
15:59people are more likely to give honest, candid answers than if they're in a group of people
16:04and they feel sort of that peer pressure of what's a good answer and what's a bad answer.
16:08Your name is going to come up sooner or later,
16:10so I would prefer to just get it out in front of the potential jurors to begin with.
16:17My e-questionnaire is going to be fairly basic.
16:19It's going to focus on qualifications, the charges, the witnesses,
16:27and then obviously whether they have an opinion about you or this case.
16:33For the people that make it past that level, we'll question them more thoroughly in person.
16:40And like you were saying, as far as group kind of voir dire,
16:45in my experience, we went through 1,900 jurors in my last trial,
16:49so it would be good to do individual voir dire if we can than group voir dire
16:55because they learn things just in the voir dire and it disqualifies a lot of jurors.
17:03I'm not opposed to that, but that's going to be sort of a day of play it by ear sort of situation,
17:12whether we do small panels or just go a single person.
17:16If we go single person, our jury selection could extend into the next week.
17:23But if we're able to seat a jury, I would expect opening statements on April 7th, somewhere around there.
17:33Does the state indicated I have it?
17:39There was just one day in April that you wanted to go a half day?
17:44Correct, Your Honor, the 24th.
17:47All right.
17:48When can you file some sort of pretrial statement that sets forth all your potential witnesses
17:54and a statement of the facts?
17:58Probably by Thursday.
18:02All right.
18:04Does the state anticipate any presentation of autopsy photos or crime scene photos?
18:12In other words, I'm trying to gauge.
18:14I would usually put in a question about jurors may be required to view evidence that shows wounds
18:21or that sort of thing.
18:22Is there anyone that's unwilling to look at this type of evidence?
18:25Yes, Your Honor.
18:27Okay.
18:28So I will include a question about that type of evidence.
18:31Sometimes jurors don't want to look at that type of evidence.
18:36All right.
18:38Any questions or concerns about our jury selection?
18:45No, Your Honor.
18:47All right.
18:48Any questions or concerns about our jury selection, the proposed trial dates from the state?
19:00No, Your Honor.
19:02Just so I have it clear, Your Honor, we're going to start on the 31st with jury selection?
19:06Is that correct?
19:07We'll be meeting on the 31st and then actual dealing with in-person jurors on the first, second, third.
19:14Okay.
19:16Robert and I.
19:28Let me ask the Advisory Council.
19:34Are there any dates that Advisory Council would need to be dark?
19:39I am fine for April.
19:41I didn't hear back from Robert.
19:45Please let us know because in that e-questionnaire, I'm going to put in a proposed schedule.
19:52I don't know that I'm going to screen for a full six weeks based on the state's anticipated presentation, maybe five weeks.
20:05So let us know the schedule into the first week or two of May.
20:12As soon as I get an answer from him, I'll email your judicial assistant.
20:18All right.
20:25And one more time, Your Honor, so the remote question is going out on March 24th.
20:31All answers have to be back by the 27th, so we will get them on the 27th?
20:36You'll either get them late the 27th or first thing the 28th.
20:40Okay.
20:43Oh, okay.
20:44You should get them some point on the 27th.
20:46Just so we can plan, because it sounds like we'll just go out to Estrella and go through these.
20:54You'll have to have an Internet connection.
20:58Yeah, we can use our laptops out there.
21:00Okay.
21:01Because you want to be ready to discuss everything on March 31st.
21:04Yeah, and if the parties have an obvious, you know, there's some jurors that are going to be obvious that need to be let go.
21:12If you're ready for that, that's always helpful.
21:14I know it's a little bit more difficult with a pro-court defendant in consulting like that.
21:23All right, let me get to...
21:25This one will come out on Friday.
21:33All right, the defendant had filed two separate motions for specific discovery.
21:40The first dealt with communication between the assigned deputy county attorney and law enforcement agencies.
21:48I've read the...
21:51And the second one was...
21:53Well, let's deal with the first one.
21:54I've read the response from the state.
21:59Basically, your response is you have disclosed all those communications.
22:03There are no other communications.
22:05Correct, Your Honor.
22:06All right.
22:08So, let me ask the defendant.
22:13Yeah, we received six email communications, and they were in a short time frame, not the full time frame.
22:20And it seems to me that in the last email ends in kind of a question that was probably answered,
22:27and then there's like no more communication.
22:29So, it doesn't make sense that there's no more.
22:31We asked for all of them, if they could be provided to us.
22:33We don't understand why they're not being provided to us and what the state is possibly hiding at this point.
22:40And they can't just turn it over so that we can go through them.
22:43It's been, you know, long over a month since we filed that motion.
22:47We would just like them to please turn over whatever they have left.
22:51All right.
22:52And I'll ask the deputy county attorney.
22:55I imagine some communications are by phone.
22:58So, in other words, we're not captured.
23:01Correct, Your Honor.
23:02All right.
23:03Based on the state's avowal, I don't know.
23:09I can't tell them to turn over something they say they don't have.
23:14So, I'll find that the state, based on their avowal, and officers of the court have complied with the request.
23:22The second one is a little more I wanted to get clarification on.
23:26That was defendant's request for video interviews.
23:33But it seemed like, based on the state's response, that there was some confusion about what was an interview recorded in an interrogation room situation versus a body cam.
23:45Did the state's response provide clarification to you?
23:49No.
23:50So, the body cams were turned over, and they're in, like, 12-minute increments.
23:55There's, like, four different body cams.
23:57This was a full two-hour video that was released by Gilbert Police to the public, and it's online.
24:03So, I would like that video of the interrogation room, the full two-hour one, to be turned over to the defense.
24:10All right.
24:11So, do you know what that is?
24:14Your Honor, based upon the defendant's reply, she's requesting a video interview from the 31st.
24:26Those are on body cam and were turned over to the defense.
24:33We have requested everything from, I think that one was from, actually, the Gilbert Police Department.
24:42A lot of these overlap.
24:45So, I am not sure what the defendant is.
24:49Who was the person being interviewed in, you said, the two-hour interrogation that Gilbert released?
24:58So, it's myself and my daughter, Tylee Ryan, and Melanie Gibb.
25:04And is that in an interrogation-type room?
25:07Yeah, it was at the Gilbert Police Station.
25:09I didn't realize we were being filmed that whole time.
25:11I didn't know we were being filmed, but we were being filmed in that room.
25:18And are you familiar with a video in a room?
25:22Yes, that's what we have disclosed.
25:25And you're saying you haven't gotten that?
25:31They have given 4, about 12-minute, body cam videos of the policemen's body cams that were in the room with us,
25:39and they go in and out of the room at different times.
25:41So, there's different body cams.
25:43They're all mixed up.
25:45It's not the full entire one.
25:47My understanding is that the full entire two-hour interrogation room video from the ceiling is available online,
25:58but I don't have it in Discovery.
26:00That's what I'm trying to clarify.
26:02So, did the state disclose a, not a body cam, but an interrogation from up in the corner of a room vantage point?
26:13We disclosed a lot.
26:16Let me see if I can find out.
26:18You did?
26:20Yes, my paralegal is present here as well, and she has advised that we did.
26:25Your Honor, we disclosed over.
26:27Can your paralegal provide a Bates number or something so that maybe the defense just has overlooked it?
26:36Let me see if we can find the actual, maybe the Discovery notice, Discovery letter.
26:44Okay.
27:05Okay.
27:35Okay.
28:19Your Honor, all we do have is the four body cam.
28:22We can ask again and see if they have an overall.
28:30you.
28:39Are you getting this have you
28:40seen this or someone told you
28:40that there's this video my
28:41mitigator showed me part of
28:42that video yes.
28:47Previous with my previous
28:48team. That's how I know about
28:49otherwise I wouldn't know
28:49about it and she she said you
28:50know this is online I didn't
28:51have any idea.
28:51So I don't know if I'm going to
28:56be able to find it.
28:57Correct. All right, I'll ask
28:57the state to follow up.
28:58With Gilbert on that.
29:05If that is out there obviously
29:05it should have been disclosed.
29:11All right remind me to follow
29:11up on that next time we are
29:15together.
29:19Next I have a motion when the.
29:192 motions and let me one
29:20second.
29:24I have a second.
29:32Tylee Ryan's.
29:35All right so.
29:39Let me ask the defendant.
29:42Generally any out of here says
29:43defined as any out of court
29:43statement offered for the
29:47truth of the matter.
29:47Asserted the state is
29:49blanketing the whole thing
29:51and obviously it's like a case
29:56by case basis right on the
29:57state's statement. So there's
29:58the.
29:58The state is blanketing the
29:59whole thing and obviously
30:00there's some exceptions to the
30:01hearsay rule and there are
30:01other things that are
30:02characterized as non hearsay.
30:03So how do you think.
30:03Let's first talk about Alex
30:04Cox how do you think the
30:05statements.
30:08Fit into your either one of
30:09those exceptions or non
30:15hearsay.
30:15I feel like that.
30:16I feel like that.
30:19I feel like that.
30:20The state's statement
30:23so there's the police
30:25interview of Alex Cox that I
30:28do not think falls under
30:28hearsay.
30:31Why does it not fall under
30:34hearsay.
30:37We're not using it for the
30:38truth of the matter asserted
30:39we're using in cooperation of
30:44the circumstances. Everyone
30:45came in and told their same
30:46that's what I'm saying I don't
30:50know if I'm misunderstanding
30:51what you're saying.
30:52Arguing that what he said was
30:57true.
30:58I can't say whether the other
30:59person says that it's true or
31:02not, but I'm saying what he
31:03said and what my daughter said
31:03and what I said in those 3
31:07police interviews.
31:07Determined what the police
31:11said how the police acted what
31:11they did after that their next
31:12steps how they treated the
31:15entire case like it was
31:15an accident.
31:18I don't know if I'm misunderstanding
31:18what you're saying.
31:21For that purpose.
31:30But I also think that.
31:35Alex's statements also.
31:36A lot of the exceptions apply
31:408 oh 3 8 oh 4.
31:41There's a lot of exceptions
31:42that also apply to some of his
31:43statements.
31:47But I'm just curious.
31:48With like which statements do
31:54you think.
31:54Specifically his statements
31:55made on body cam to police in
32:00the driveway specifically his
32:00I don't I don't know what the
32:01statements are so that's what
32:02I'm asking what statement what
32:05specific statements do you
32:06think.
32:06Are allowed to come in under
32:10the rules of evidence.
32:12I think it's not a present
32:17sense impression.
32:17It's at at the House of
32:21presence and compression is.
32:22Where you're actually
32:23observing something and you're
32:24talking about it as you see it
32:30happened so.
32:30Is that he's saying.
32:31Again I don't know what the
32:32statements are but is he
32:32saying.
32:33What happened prior.
32:38Or is he saying.
32:39I don't know what the
32:44statements are.
32:45But I'm just curious.
32:45I think it's 8 oh 3, 2, excited
32:47utterance he was under the
32:48stress of the whole situation
32:48when he made those statements.
32:54What was his demeanor when he
32:55made those statements.
33:01What's the specific
33:06statement.
33:06I shot my brother-in-law on
33:09the street.
33:10I shot my brother-in-law on
33:13the street.
33:13I don't know what all the
33:14statements are but how long
33:17after the.
33:17Incident did he make the
33:19statements.
33:20Immediately after as far as I
33:24know.
33:24Well immediately to some
33:25people means 2 seconds to
33:26other people, it means.
33:2930 minutes.
33:30Tell me what immediately means
33:33to you.
33:36As soon as the police arrived.
33:36I don't know what did they
33:38do.
33:38I don't know what time they
33:39arrived.
33:39I don't know what time they
33:40arrived.
33:44I was not there I do not know
33:45what time they are.
33:49All right.
33:57So you're asserting excited
33:57utterance some of the
33:58statements come in what else.
34:028 oh 3, 3, the mental
34:03emotional and physical
34:04condition because it shows his
34:04or her mental health.
34:11Any others.
34:17Yes.
34:178 oh 3, 5, the the recorded
34:18recollection. I know that in
34:21the in the states replied to
34:24my response.
34:29They did not think that 5.
34:30Applied because a BNC but I
34:35believe that the 8 oh 3, 5,
34:36the recorded recollection of
34:36the body cam footage.
34:39Were what.
34:43Needed to be put together.
34:45So be was made or adopted by
34:46this witness when the matter
34:48was fresh in the witnesses
34:48memory and accurately reflects
34:52the witnesses knowledge.
34:55So I felt like 8 oh 3, 5, be
34:55the recorded recollection of
34:56his police interview and the
34:59body cam footage.
35:04So I'm not sure if this is
35:05something that the state
35:06responded to.
35:09Something they wrote down or
35:11maybe they recorded their
35:11voice saying something.
35:17That's the state to respond.
35:17We're just talking about the
35:19Alex Cox.
35:24Statements.
35:25Let me maybe I should start
35:26with does the state intend on.
35:29I'm not sure if this is
35:30something that the state
35:31responded to.
35:35I haven't decided if we will
35:38at this point we would I can
35:39say 100% certainty we will not
35:39be admitting his interview by
35:42police that was done it.
35:43After 10 o'clock in the
35:48morning.
35:49We don't.
35:51Are you referencing what time
35:51he was interviewed versus the
35:54time of the incident.
35:56Let me I guess let me say it
35:57again.
36:00I'm not sure if this is
36:01something that is actually in
36:04our motion we show that.
36:11When 8.30 AM when I'm a woman
36:15call was made so we have soon
36:16after that the police arrived
36:19and there's body cam video
36:25from that that interview.
36:27And that was made.
36:30After 10 o'clock in the
36:31morning.
36:36So you may or may not be
36:36attempting to introduce.
36:42Statements at or around the
36:45time that the police responded.
36:45Correct or if we do those
36:47would be brought in
36:51against the party interest so
36:54obviously the state can bring
36:55in the police to do that.
36:58I'm not sure if that's what
36:58you're referring to.
37:03I guess.
37:06Is the state intending on
37:07introducing.
37:10Any statements of Tylee.
37:13I really made no statement at
37:13the scene other than giving
37:16her general.
37:19Biographical information on
37:21body cam her entire statements
37:22were made at the police
37:23station.
37:24And that's all I have to say
37:25about that.
37:30response as it relates to
37:32Tylee you say again present
37:33sense impression. I don't think
37:36it's a present sense
37:37impression. You also are you
37:42excited utterance what else.
37:443, 3, which is mental
37:45emotional and physical
37:45condition. But the same thing
37:50I'm not sure if that's what
37:51you're referring to.
37:54I'm not sure if that's what
37:55you're referring to.
37:55And that's the statement in
37:58the indictment where Tylee says
38:00that Charles says if you hit
38:00me with that that you're going
38:01to jail that's the part where
38:04she's nervous in her interview
38:05saying she she's scared to
38:05tell the police that she's the
38:06one that brought in the back
38:11so. State of and statement
38:12against interest both apply to
38:12the defendant and the witness.
38:25All right anything else the
38:26state want to be heard further
38:28on that.
38:29The only further thing I think
38:31that the state will bring in
38:32is that obviously the defendant
38:33has been found guilty of
38:36killing both highly. Other
38:37individuals that in this case
38:41the defendant from killing a
38:42child. And so we believe that
38:46the defendant has been found
38:47guilty of killing a child and
38:48we believe that her statements
38:51being admissible under the
38:52rules of evidence. As any of
38:53the exceptions that the
38:53defendant has done we also
38:54believe that it would be
38:55improper for her to be allowed
38:57to bring them in under that
38:58theory.
39:03In other words the.
39:04There's been a judicial
39:10trial.
39:15And she has been convicted of
39:16that.
39:22All right.
39:27On a preliminary basis
39:30precluding references to Tylee
39:32Ryan's statements any
39:32statement made by Tylee Ryan
39:37if there's some reason.
39:39I'm not aware of that.
39:40I'm not aware of that at all.
39:40So I'm not going to.
39:46Make a request outside the
39:46presence of the jury regarding
39:47that we'll deal with that
39:48outside the presence of the
39:53jury. On Alex Cox I think
39:54that's probably going to be
39:54more of a statement by
39:59statement. But I'm skeptical
40:00of any statements coming in.
40:06I'm not aware of any
40:09information that comes in.
40:12When the police first arrived
40:13on scene and or the 9, 1, 1,
40:20At the time that.
40:21They're attempted to be
40:33arrested.
40:42States notice of disclosure
40:43and request for disclosure.
40:44Did you get a copy of that.
40:48You haven't seen that yet.
40:55States notice of disclosure
40:58and request for disclosure.
40:59I don't actually I didn't
40:59realize it was actually felt
41:00January. 16th. I got it
41:08yesterday. It was felt January
41:1116th. Have you seen them.
41:13I'm looking at what what are
41:17we.
41:18It's just I think the court
41:21may have ruled on that one
41:22I'm looking at what are we.
41:34She submit to fingerprints
41:39palm print footprint.
41:40That's okay. I think that was
41:44fired. Yes, significantly so.
41:44That would be to her to any
41:48of her.
41:49I'm not sure if we're going to
41:52be here on the 18th.
41:52Did you want to do that.
41:57If we're going to be here on
42:00the 18th we can take them
42:01down. I don't know that we
42:05need to be here on the 18th.
42:05And obviously I was unaware
42:06we were going to set this
42:07because we've said it.
42:15I'm not sure if we're going to
42:18be here on the 18th.
42:18I'm not sure if we're going to
42:22be here on the 18th.
42:23You requested copies of any
42:23recorded statements made
42:27during interviews conducted.
42:28Outside of your presence is
42:29there any of those were there
42:29any interviews. Conducted by
42:35you or your team.
42:36Were there any interviews
42:36conducted of any witnesses out
42:37by you or your team that
42:41you're aware of.
42:42Do you have a plan on.
42:47Calling any experts to
42:52testify. We do plan on calling
42:53one expert was that has it
42:56been disclosed to the state.
42:57We are yes, we're working on
43:02that today as an addendum to
43:03the witness list Lonnie
43:07Dworkin.
43:08The expert that's on the
43:12stand there Jeff white.
43:12That's the expert what kind
43:17of. Expert is Lonnie Dworkin
43:20phone and digital I think I've
43:20yeah I remember us in are you
43:26aware of that.
43:27All right expert disclosures
43:29are due 30 days. Before trial
43:36to be here on the 18th. So I
43:44right away and I may have to
43:45take that up. Depending on
43:48what the state's position is.
43:50But at this point it's
43:52technically late. Maybe
43:52another reason to be here on
43:53the 18th obviously that's
43:55disclosed this week. We can
43:56potentially address that issue
44:01on the 18th. Let me ask the
44:02defendant do you have a
44:06record on that. I don't see
44:10any reason why that type.
44:15Things are permitted. Over any
44:15defendant objection so you
44:16have a record want to make on
44:20that. Not really I don't see
44:21any reason why this I don't
44:23understand. In the event that
44:27you're convicted. It may be
44:27used to prove other
44:33convictions. That reminds me
44:33that you have a record on
44:38that.
44:39Regardless of what happens in
44:40the first row. I believe so
44:43yes, your and House. Much time
44:46would you need between the
44:46conclusion of the first trial
44:49and the start of the second
44:49trial.
44:50I would say at least 30 days
44:52since we do need to just to
44:53actually subpoena out of state
44:59witnesses for the second
44:59trial.
45:00I'm going to go ahead and set
45:03that.
45:04A provisional.
45:09Second trial date now.
45:16We have a second trial date.
45:30Is that second trial. How long
45:35do you think it would take the
45:35state to about 3 weeks as well
45:36you can't do 2 trials at once.
45:54I'd like to remind the court
46:06in this case. They do not
46:11want to do 2 trials at once
46:13they don't want to do 2 trials
46:14at once. So it really violates
46:16my speedy trial rights if they
46:17do not give me a speedy trial
46:18by May 11th a couple cases.
46:27Not to mention that they did
46:30they did combine all the
46:31discovery into one case. They
46:33didn't give me 2 different
46:33separate discoveries for 2
46:34different cases which would be
46:35the state wanted to come combine both cases.
46:39Your Honor, if the court gave us a little time to work it out and the defendant wants to join them, I mean, obviously,
46:48I don't know that the normal defense attorney, and I don't mean that in any way, normally they would be
46:55severed, severed because you don't want one jury to know about the other correct.
47:002 separate charges and have a harmful rub off effect of
47:04one, the evidence in one case affecting the evidence in another case.
47:09Correct. That's why they were filed separately.
47:11But if the defendant wants them together, the state would have to request this be pushed back slightly so that we could then get all the witnesses for that trial together since they were not subpoenaed for this trial.
47:24But if that's what the defendant wants to join them, and she understands that prejudice,
47:29and that she's then going to be waiving that prejudice with that,
47:34then the state is certainly willing to do that.
47:38But we would then have to request to have that trial or this trial, they moved back to allow us to get the other witnesses lined up.
48:00Second.
48:23That was not yeah, that's not what I was saying to combine them I'm just saying give me my second trial by May 11th so.
48:29I'm going to wait some time on that second trial over the defendant's objection. Primarily, again, the defendant can't try both cases at the same time.
48:39Secondly, I'm not sure how much actual prejudice there is with a time violation in the sense that you wouldn't be released from custody anyway.
48:58And thirdly, the rule for time violations under Rule 8, I think it's 6, 8.6 is that any violation should be a dismissal without prejudice unless there's an actual prejudice shown, in which case the state could just refile the charge.
49:15Regardless, I think some time is warranted to be excluded because primarily you can't try two cases at once.
49:24What if we set a start date for May 12th? I realize that could potentially be a quick turnaround, but again, I don't think this case is going to take 6 weeks.
49:36We can adjust that as necessary.
49:38I, again, am going to ask for a longer time.
49:40I believe this will go through the beginning of May, and to have the state try to get those witnesses lined up and subpoenaed while in trial, I don't believe is.
49:55Well, if I push it out any further, the parties need to be aware that I won't be trying the case.
50:03I don't think I would be anyway. I'm rotating it then to June.
50:09And given some of the trainings I have to attend in June, I don't think we can get it done.
50:19Well, both parties could send out subpoenas now for that second date for May 12th, correct?
50:30Well, that's assuming we're done by about May 1st, probably, in this case, the first case.
50:39And then, Your Honor, I did indicate that the state needs to be dark in May, the 21st, 22nd, and 23rd.
50:57You said 21, 22, 23?
51:04Correct.
51:05And I would need to be dark the 19th, 20th, and 21st as well, so.
51:14Given that we would be dark that entire week anyways, it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense to.
51:20All right, let me, sorry to interrupt, I need to, let me speak with the criminal presiding judge about scheduling the second trial.
51:28We can discuss it on the 18th.
51:34Let's keep the 18th, but let's move it to later in the morning.
51:47Actually, let's move it up.
51:49All we're going to do is discuss a couple matters, and then there's no reason for the fingerprinting and stuff to be broadcast or on video,
51:59so I'll prohibit that from being recorded or otherwise broadcast.
52:07So have your person here.
52:09Let's do that at 8, 15 a.m. on March 18th.
52:17And then we'll also discuss whether the defense is disclosing Lonnie Dworkin as a witness and whether or not he has a report, expert report prepared and disclosed at that time.
52:34I will have the questionnaire for you by then so you can review it.
52:40Anything else we need to discuss that I've forgotten about from the state's perspective?
52:45I showed two other motions that the defense filed that I did not see rulings on by the court.
52:52They were both motions to dismiss.
52:57One of them only related to the 2022 case, I think.
53:04No, I'm sorry.
53:06Both of them related to both.
53:10What's the filing due?
53:17January 14th.
53:19One of them was an 8.2 trial on February 4th, which was an extradition rule, 8.3.
53:42I'm sorry.
53:45February 4th.
54:01That minute entry was filed January 24th.
54:03And then the motion.
54:08Was that the motion to dismiss CR 2021 and 001704 and the other for violation of speedy trial act?
54:17Correct.
54:18That was ruled on on February 25th.
54:21So last week, a week ago.
54:27Anything else from the state?
54:29Anything else from the defendant?
54:30Yes, your honor.
54:31I have one kind of housekeeping matter that I wanted to ask you about.
54:35I know that MCSO has some security restraints, the things that I have to wear during trial.
54:44And I wanted to ask about that as far as am I going to be able to stand at the podium to talk to witnesses, to question my witnesses and to cross examine?
54:54I'm going to be able to move about with the leg thing and the shock vest and all that.
55:00You can.
55:02You're going to stick to your table and you can go to the podium.
55:06Okay.
55:07When you're giving your opening statement and closing argument, you'll stay by the podium.
55:11Okay.
55:12And if you need to hand a witness and exhibit, your advisory council will do that.
55:18Okay.
55:19Or my paralegal can do that.
55:21Well, is your paralegal going to be present here designated as your...
55:28I guess they can be present.
55:31I'd prefer advisory council to be the one that approaches witnesses if you need to hand an exhibit or something like that.
55:37Okay.
55:38So I'm going to be standing there and if she's sitting here, she's going to come get something from me and go walk it over to the witness and then come back?
55:44Correct.
55:45Just the logistics of it.
55:46Yeah, and there'll be a table or a cart here that'll have all the exhibits on it within reach of the podium.
55:53Okay.
55:56Anything else?
56:00Your Honor, do you use case lines for exhibits?
56:02No.
56:06I think they're still working out the bugs on that.
56:09Do we need to have our exhibits in place?
56:12All right.
56:13We'll see you at 8.15 on March 18th.
56:18We have recess on this matter.
56:19It's usually like a day or two.
56:34All right.