1
00:00:01,520 --> 00:00:06,080
Speaker 1: Full trial audio everything hurting court no silences to skip.

2
00:00:06,799 --> 00:00:10,080
Speaker 2: Okay, yes, please you want to before in the court

3
00:00:10,119 --> 00:00:12,919
today we have the manner of polo versus Lindsay Clancy.

4
00:00:13,000 --> 00:00:16,239
MS Clancy is present. She is represented by Attorney Kevin Reddington.

5
00:00:16,800 --> 00:00:19,760
The karam Love is represented by Assistant District Attorney Jennifer

6
00:00:19,800 --> 00:00:23,760
Sprague and Assistant District Attorney Shannon Buckingham.

7
00:00:23,839 --> 00:00:30,440
Speaker 1: All right, we'll good afternoon, council. Good afternoon, Ms Clancy. Council. Uh,

8
00:00:30,839 --> 00:00:31,359
can I see it?

9
00:00:31,480 --> 00:00:33,920
Speaker 3: Cybar all right, council.

10
00:00:34,600 --> 00:00:38,880
Speaker 1: What right thought we'd do is kind of kind of

11
00:00:39,039 --> 00:00:41,799
just go through kind of a list of matters that

12
00:00:41,840 --> 00:00:44,960
we have to so I know we have to talk

13
00:00:45,000 --> 00:00:49,600
about panelment, talk about scheduling, uh, and then some of

14
00:00:49,640 --> 00:00:51,880
the pre trial matters. We're going to go or and

15
00:00:51,960 --> 00:00:56,520
talk to counsel regards to if the defendant at some

16
00:00:56,640 --> 00:00:59,799
point is going to request be absent from the court

17
00:01:00,119 --> 00:01:01,520
at some points or of the draw. I want to

18
00:01:01,520 --> 00:01:06,239
go over that. No, I know, that's I'm just the

19
00:01:06,280 --> 00:01:08,760
reason I wanted to raise it so that if it

20
00:01:09,120 --> 00:01:12,840
is not carbonsol, but if it comes up, that's fine.

21
00:01:13,079 --> 00:01:15,480
The reason I'm saying it is I know that was great.

22
00:01:15,719 --> 00:01:18,560
It may come up, that's all. And if it comes up,

23
00:01:18,680 --> 00:01:22,079
it may come up because of observations I make. I'm

24
00:01:22,079 --> 00:01:25,000
not saying that the defendant would be requesting that, but

25
00:01:25,040 --> 00:01:28,200
I just kind of wanted to let counsel know how

26
00:01:28,280 --> 00:01:31,959
I would handle that if that came. Then we want

27
00:01:32,000 --> 00:01:36,000
to talk just about and then we've got the blood

28
00:01:36,000 --> 00:01:38,799
spatter motion. We have to address belief.

29
00:01:39,239 --> 00:01:42,400
Speaker 4: Well, I've changed course on that and I've talked to

30
00:01:42,439 --> 00:01:43,439
defense counts about that.

31
00:01:43,519 --> 00:01:47,719
Speaker 5: Today. I'm no longer going to well, my goal is.

32
00:01:47,719 --> 00:01:52,200
Speaker 4: No longer to use a physical demonstration during prep with

33
00:01:52,319 --> 00:01:55,879
the witness. We realized that a series of photographs might

34
00:01:56,079 --> 00:02:00,680
better display the different types of spatter. The witness is

35
00:02:00,719 --> 00:02:04,799
sending me photos that she uses during trainings when she

36
00:02:04,840 --> 00:02:07,640
trains other people, and I'll send those two defense counsels

37
00:02:07,560 --> 00:02:09,639
and you should be able to agree on and photos,

38
00:02:09,639 --> 00:02:10,520
I think, right.

39
00:02:11,719 --> 00:02:15,759
Speaker 1: And so with that, h we don't need to address

40
00:02:15,800 --> 00:02:16,599
that motion today.

41
00:02:17,159 --> 00:02:19,080
Speaker 5: I don't believe that it can be.

42
00:02:19,000 --> 00:02:26,199
Speaker 1: Difficulty photos, all right, So we won't address that. So

43
00:02:27,159 --> 00:02:30,759
just want we talk a little bit about panelment. And

44
00:02:30,840 --> 00:02:41,439
the procedure that I would consider UH doing is implementing

45
00:02:42,080 --> 00:02:48,800
a questionnaire and I drew up a draft of one.

46
00:02:48,840 --> 00:02:51,240
I'll give it and can kind of do a final

47
00:02:51,360 --> 00:02:54,919
talk through on Monday when we do that. But this

48
00:02:55,000 --> 00:02:57,159
is just so you can take a look at it.

49
00:02:57,159 --> 00:02:59,960
It's just eight or nine questions, and so my thought

50
00:03:00,039 --> 00:03:03,400
would be, have the jury come up here as a whole,

51
00:03:04,240 --> 00:03:08,280
give them an introduction to the case. Give the carwaws.

52
00:03:08,680 --> 00:03:10,159
Do we have a statement of the case.

53
00:03:11,479 --> 00:03:15,879
Speaker 4: I've submitted the final pre trial home and the defense

54
00:03:15,960 --> 00:03:20,479
councils submitted a paragraph that he would like read that

55
00:03:20,560 --> 00:03:21,800
the Komwall's objecting to.

56
00:03:22,120 --> 00:03:24,840
Speaker 1: All right, well why don't we So we'll circle back

57
00:03:24,879 --> 00:03:28,639
on that, and then I think go through the general

58
00:03:28,719 --> 00:03:37,639
questions with the jury, then send them back downstairs to

59
00:03:37,680 --> 00:03:42,520
fill out this questionnaire. My other thought is that there

60
00:03:42,680 --> 00:03:47,919
is an extensive witness list, and it may make more

61
00:03:48,000 --> 00:03:51,240
sense to have the jury be handed a copy of

62
00:03:51,280 --> 00:03:54,639
that list, bring that down with them when they're answering

63
00:03:54,680 --> 00:04:00,000
the questionnaire, because this last encountered was over two hundred days,

64
00:04:01,199 --> 00:04:04,360
and I think it would be difficult for anybody to

65
00:04:04,400 --> 00:04:06,560
sit there and try and remember who it is. Do

66
00:04:06,639 --> 00:04:09,280
I know that person or not? So my thought would

67
00:04:09,319 --> 00:04:12,159
be to give them the questionnaire, give them the witness list,

68
00:04:12,439 --> 00:04:16,519
send them downstairs to fill that out. That then gives

69
00:04:16,600 --> 00:04:18,720
us an opportunity to take a break line up for

70
00:04:18,800 --> 00:04:22,480
the individual part of the idea, uh, and then bring

71
00:04:22,560 --> 00:04:24,279
them up and bring them in one at a time

72
00:04:25,120 --> 00:04:30,240
into the courtroom over here at sidebar H and just

73
00:04:30,319 --> 00:04:31,120
proceed that way.

74
00:04:32,680 --> 00:04:34,199
Speaker 5: I think that's a good idea, your honor.

75
00:04:34,199 --> 00:04:36,240
Speaker 4: I would just ask if those witness lists be collected

76
00:04:36,279 --> 00:04:37,759
from the jurors as they leave.

77
00:04:38,480 --> 00:04:40,839
Speaker 1: That's a good idea. Yeah, I have no, missus Rington,

78
00:04:41,879 --> 00:04:44,439
all right, so what so that's that's the way we'll

79
00:04:44,480 --> 00:04:49,319
do that. Let me see, I have a here's a

80
00:04:50,040 --> 00:04:53,199
draft of those questions on the We can go over

81
00:04:53,279 --> 00:04:56,720
these on Monday. But this is being proposed. Don could

82
00:04:56,759 --> 00:05:02,519
you thank them.

83
00:05:00,959 --> 00:05:03,199
Speaker 4: You're runner the the witness list. That'd be a combined

84
00:05:03,199 --> 00:05:05,000
the list with both right, and.

85
00:05:05,079 --> 00:05:09,480
Speaker 1: They won't be listed as defense or uh almost witnesses.

86
00:05:09,600 --> 00:05:09,879
Speaker 5: Thank you.

87
00:05:12,240 --> 00:05:15,560
Speaker 1: So this is just a rough draft of the question,

88
00:05:15,639 --> 00:05:19,879
isn't it uh bring them up? My thought would be

89
00:05:19,959 --> 00:05:25,120
too uh in panel uh eighteen on this case, cause

90
00:05:25,120 --> 00:05:28,959
it's gonna be uh a lengthy trial and then so

91
00:05:29,000 --> 00:05:33,040
everybody's gonna get well, I know there's motion for additional challenges,

92
00:05:33,959 --> 00:05:35,839
So why do I hear you on that at this point,

93
00:05:36,040 --> 00:05:42,560
mister Reddington, H are you gonna talk about the questionnaire

94
00:05:42,600 --> 00:05:44,439
eventually or yeah, I won't give you to right?

95
00:05:44,480 --> 00:05:45,920
Speaker 3: Are they just could thank you?

96
00:05:47,519 --> 00:05:47,959
Speaker 1: Uh? Right?

97
00:05:48,040 --> 00:05:51,279
Speaker 3: I have filed a request for uh additional challenges.

98
00:05:51,519 --> 00:05:51,600
Speaker 1: Uh.

99
00:05:52,560 --> 00:05:55,959
Speaker 3: I understand that UH would be entitled to eighteen? Is

100
00:05:55,959 --> 00:05:56,399
that correct?

101
00:05:56,560 --> 00:05:56,839
Speaker 1: Correct?

102
00:05:56,920 --> 00:05:59,560
Speaker 3: The side was told you might kind of eighteen yours

103
00:06:00,759 --> 00:06:04,439
we're going to see eighteen. So I'm asking and I

104
00:06:04,480 --> 00:06:07,279
don't know if the government agrees that we would have

105
00:06:07,439 --> 00:06:11,680
additional jurors. Obviously that would be committed to us sound discretion.

106
00:06:12,240 --> 00:06:15,480
But it's the type of case not only publicity wise

107
00:06:15,639 --> 00:06:21,040
that usually deal with, but just the sheer emotional impact

108
00:06:21,199 --> 00:06:23,279
that this case is going to have on jurors. And

109
00:06:23,319 --> 00:06:28,600
I have always felt that jurors really, you know, take

110
00:06:28,839 --> 00:06:34,079
to heart their obligations under a jury trial, and literally

111
00:06:34,199 --> 00:06:38,480
had occasions you're run into nervous of older cases, emotionally

112
00:06:38,560 --> 00:06:42,040
charged cases in public places and they would shake my

113
00:06:42,079 --> 00:06:44,879
hand and they cry, and that to be like five

114
00:06:44,920 --> 00:06:48,639
or ten years later in the impact of this case,

115
00:06:49,000 --> 00:06:54,560
which in my decades trying cases, is probably the most

116
00:06:55,480 --> 00:06:58,600
emotionally disturbing and challenging, I think is going to have

117
00:06:58,639 --> 00:07:02,279
a significant impact on and jurors, more so than the

118
00:07:02,439 --> 00:07:07,519
usual that we deal with. So recognizing that eighteen challenges

119
00:07:07,600 --> 00:07:11,040
might sound like a lot, I just feel that perhaps

120
00:07:11,360 --> 00:07:14,959
an additional number of jurors subjects of europe discretion would

121
00:07:14,959 --> 00:07:18,240
be appropriate, especially with the length of time that they're

122
00:07:18,279 --> 00:07:21,480
talking about, along with the emotional factors.

123
00:07:22,920 --> 00:07:23,240
Speaker 1: Come on.

124
00:07:24,439 --> 00:07:28,639
Speaker 4: I would join in the request for the additional countery challenges,

125
00:07:29,160 --> 00:07:32,120
And I just have a question in terms of if

126
00:07:32,160 --> 00:07:35,399
the Court is going to Panel eighteen about the seating

127
00:07:35,680 --> 00:07:38,560
of the two additional because we want to make sure

128
00:07:38,600 --> 00:07:42,839
they have adequate viewing of the monitor and the witness box.

129
00:07:43,920 --> 00:07:45,480
Speaker 5: But other than that, no chection.

130
00:07:47,920 --> 00:07:52,920
Speaker 1: I'm gonna I want to consider this motion with both

131
00:07:52,959 --> 00:07:59,319
parties requesting it puts it a little different path that

132
00:07:59,480 --> 00:08:01,800
usually have on this so but I do understand the

133
00:08:01,879 --> 00:08:06,920
uniqueness of this case, the allegations, so I'm gonna take

134
00:08:06,959 --> 00:08:09,800
that under advisement. We'll left the parties over the next

135
00:08:09,879 --> 00:08:14,680
day or two, so that'll be under advisement. And in

136
00:08:14,720 --> 00:08:18,680
regards to the seeding of the sure of my thought

137
00:08:18,720 --> 00:08:21,759
would be what I've done before is to have not

138
00:08:21,800 --> 00:08:24,639
to have those two side by side, but one in

139
00:08:24,680 --> 00:08:29,120
front of the other. And I think we haven't had

140
00:08:29,120 --> 00:08:32,600
that problem before in regards to being able to see

141
00:08:33,120 --> 00:08:36,159
either the witness because it kind of lines up, and

142
00:08:36,200 --> 00:08:40,159
then the screen, which I imagine is gonna be used here,

143
00:08:41,240 --> 00:08:44,080
might have to turn it a little bit. But I

144
00:08:44,200 --> 00:08:48,399
the cases I've done before with the eighteen, uh, the

145
00:08:48,440 --> 00:08:51,320
all the jurors were able to see. And then what

146
00:08:51,360 --> 00:08:53,840
we'll do is, I'll just ask them, as we're going

147
00:08:53,879 --> 00:08:55,679
through this, because everybody can see this, if you can't

148
00:08:55,679 --> 00:08:58,240
see it, let us know. If we have to adjust

149
00:08:58,279 --> 00:09:02,519
the screen or adjust the eating at that point, we'll

150
00:09:02,519 --> 00:09:05,440
do that. But I haven't had that problem, but I

151
00:09:05,519 --> 00:09:09,159
don't have them side by side like that. So all right,

152
00:09:12,480 --> 00:09:16,679
any other questions in regards to the panelment come up,

153
00:09:18,639 --> 00:09:23,519
mister Reddington. I mean, I think we've all we've all

154
00:09:23,559 --> 00:09:27,639
done cases with each other, so I would expect they'll

155
00:09:27,679 --> 00:09:29,440
be kind of handled the way we've done it before.

156
00:09:29,519 --> 00:09:33,399
So uh So that's that would be the impanelment. Uh

157
00:09:34,039 --> 00:09:39,720
As they said. With the schedule, as I indicated over here,

158
00:09:41,159 --> 00:09:44,120
I'm gonna tell the jurors what the schedule is going

159
00:09:44,200 --> 00:09:47,960
to be. But let them know that it's a fluid

160
00:09:48,279 --> 00:09:51,240
situation in regards to how long the trial is going

161
00:09:51,320 --> 00:09:53,399
to be, how long the schedules you know, on the

162
00:09:53,440 --> 00:09:57,519
day by day, So I'm not going to be very precise,

163
00:09:57,600 --> 00:09:59,480
I don't think. And we'll again we'll talk a little

164
00:09:59,480 --> 00:10:02,399
bit more of me be on on Monday. In regards

165
00:10:02,399 --> 00:10:08,279
to how I addressed that with the voider, let me

166
00:10:08,360 --> 00:10:15,600
see the other issue that I had just in regards

167
00:10:15,679 --> 00:10:18,240
to and I know mister Rankton indicated that you don't

168
00:10:18,240 --> 00:10:22,399
believe there's going to be a request for the defendant

169
00:10:22,480 --> 00:10:25,919
to be absent from me there, and so what I

170
00:10:26,000 --> 00:10:28,720
would just so the parties would know if that comes

171
00:10:28,799 --> 00:10:31,399
up under Rule forty five, what would do is would

172
00:10:31,440 --> 00:10:34,840
just do a colloquy, maybe do a signed waiver, and

173
00:10:34,960 --> 00:10:37,639
we could deal with it that way, so it wouldn't

174
00:10:38,360 --> 00:10:40,399
take up a lot of time. I think it's but

175
00:10:40,519 --> 00:10:44,200
it's just better for everybody to know. That's the procedure

176
00:10:44,240 --> 00:10:46,559
that I would follow. Kind of after looking at the

177
00:10:46,639 --> 00:10:55,600
case law on that. In regards to the view, I

178
00:10:55,720 --> 00:11:00,159
know that I had allowed the commost motion for you,

179
00:11:01,320 --> 00:11:06,759
it was a proposed order with the with the Carmwealth's motion,

180
00:11:07,759 --> 00:11:13,720
I don't think I got a proposed order from the homeowner,

181
00:11:16,000 --> 00:11:20,480
and he I think he was invited to propose one,

182
00:11:21,919 --> 00:11:27,759
but I haven't seen anything. So Commonwealth, what's your position

183
00:11:27,879 --> 00:11:30,799
regards to is your order? But what are your thoughts

184
00:11:30,840 --> 00:11:31,440
in regards to that?

185
00:11:32,279 --> 00:11:35,679
Speaker 5: Well, I was approaching it as most of these types

186
00:11:35,720 --> 00:11:36,600
of cases that I do.

187
00:11:36,799 --> 00:11:39,519
Speaker 4: We usually let the homeowner know when we'll be there,

188
00:11:40,159 --> 00:11:42,200
they make sure they're out of the home and it's unlocked.

189
00:11:42,320 --> 00:11:45,759
Speaker 5: We go in a case like this where we have eighteen.

190
00:11:45,480 --> 00:11:48,240
Speaker 4: Jurors, maybe send them in in groups of four or

191
00:11:48,279 --> 00:11:51,399
something along those lines to see whatever myself in defense

192
00:11:51,440 --> 00:11:53,840
comes and want them to take note of, and then

193
00:11:53,919 --> 00:11:56,960
leave the premises with an instruction to the jurors they're

194
00:11:56,960 --> 00:11:59,159
not to open any closets or anything like that or

195
00:11:59,200 --> 00:12:00,480
touch any personal items.

196
00:12:00,519 --> 00:12:03,000
Speaker 5: And I think that's pretty much what's encompassed in the order.

197
00:12:02,840 --> 00:12:06,360
Speaker 1: If I recall, yeah, yeah, uh, Miss Rington, I have

198
00:12:06,480 --> 00:12:08,399
no position on that.

199
00:12:08,480 --> 00:12:10,799
Speaker 3: You run your runner knows that I indicated. I don't

200
00:12:10,840 --> 00:12:14,200
think it's necessary to have a view plus videos plus photographs,

201
00:12:14,279 --> 00:12:17,600
but I understand you've already made your decision on that.

202
00:12:17,919 --> 00:12:22,159
So it's a house that is now occupied by a

203
00:12:22,320 --> 00:12:26,960
man and his partner. It it doesn't look at all

204
00:12:27,360 --> 00:12:30,960
like it did before when Menci and her family was

205
00:12:31,039 --> 00:12:34,320
living there. So I defer to your discussion on UH

206
00:12:34,559 --> 00:12:35,519
any specifics on.

207
00:12:35,639 --> 00:12:39,039
Speaker 1: The view, all right, So my intention would be to UH,

208
00:12:39,120 --> 00:12:41,600
as I said, have a allow the motion for the view,

209
00:12:42,080 --> 00:12:45,039
issue that order in line with the proposed order that

210
00:12:45,200 --> 00:12:49,440
was given by the Commonwealth UH, and then as we

211
00:12:49,559 --> 00:12:53,360
go forward, we can let give the homeowner a notice

212
00:12:53,440 --> 00:12:56,399
on that and we'll have UH police and security there

213
00:12:57,279 --> 00:13:01,639
to address any of those concerns. You know in the

214
00:13:02,399 --> 00:13:05,120
order regards to the media, will also deal with no

215
00:13:05,200 --> 00:13:07,600
photography of the jury during the view.

216
00:13:08,480 --> 00:13:12,120
Speaker 3: So could I just make an observation. You're right, there's

217
00:13:12,159 --> 00:13:16,759
a situation where obviously we're dealing with people that are

218
00:13:17,799 --> 00:13:21,120
civilians or professionals, and this is not a situation where

219
00:13:21,120 --> 00:13:25,159
we're looking at a drive by murder in the middle

220
00:13:25,200 --> 00:13:27,960
of an inner city, where there's danger to jurors and stuff.

221
00:13:28,039 --> 00:13:31,519
Can I ask that the court at least limit the

222
00:13:31,600 --> 00:13:34,320
police presence. I mean, I have had it with the

223
00:13:34,360 --> 00:13:37,919
police officers on motorcycles buzzing back and forth next to

224
00:13:38,000 --> 00:13:42,159
the jury bus, and police officers stopping traffic and blue

225
00:13:42,200 --> 00:13:45,000
lights behind you, blue lights in front of you. There's

226
00:13:45,039 --> 00:13:48,159
no need for that type of police presence in this case.

227
00:13:48,200 --> 00:13:50,679
We're going to take a bus to a house in

228
00:13:50,759 --> 00:13:54,480
a residential area in Duxbury and that's it. I understand

229
00:13:54,519 --> 00:13:56,080
that there may be a need to I guess, I

230
00:13:56,080 --> 00:13:58,519
don't know, close down a road or something, but I

231
00:13:58,559 --> 00:14:00,960
would ask if we don't have such an overwhelming police

232
00:14:01,000 --> 00:14:02,679
presence for obvious reasons.

233
00:14:03,279 --> 00:14:05,519
Speaker 5: We could go to cibar. We do have a plan

234
00:14:05,799 --> 00:14:07,879
in place for security purposes.

235
00:14:08,000 --> 00:14:12,879
Speaker 1: Sure, yeah, you see cidebar. One of the motions that

236
00:14:13,080 --> 00:14:16,600
was that was a file that I argued had had

237
00:14:16,639 --> 00:14:21,200
to do with uh photographs. I know, and I allowed

238
00:14:21,360 --> 00:14:26,000
the Comwealth to be able to introduce some photographs just

239
00:14:26,200 --> 00:14:30,200
so again there's no surprises. If the car Wealth can

240
00:14:30,759 --> 00:14:34,279
provide me a copy of the photographs that they intend

241
00:14:34,919 --> 00:14:38,600
to introduce so I can look at them and make

242
00:14:38,679 --> 00:14:41,759
sure no surprise. But would be in line with the

243
00:14:41,879 --> 00:14:43,639
ruling that we talked about.

244
00:14:44,399 --> 00:14:46,399
Speaker 5: You bring to the autopsy photos you runner.

245
00:14:46,639 --> 00:14:49,919
Speaker 1: Whatever photos or the crime scene photos, perhaps.

246
00:14:53,840 --> 00:14:58,159
Speaker 5: We could provide you with either the disc with all

247
00:14:58,200 --> 00:14:58,960
the photos or.

248
00:15:00,639 --> 00:15:03,440
Speaker 4: Or it's the issue or the reason I'm hesitating is

249
00:15:04,519 --> 00:15:07,399
at the moment. As we're prepping, we're deciding what photos

250
00:15:07,440 --> 00:15:10,759
to use, but that could change mid trial. So I

251
00:15:10,799 --> 00:15:14,559
could give the disc with all of the photos for

252
00:15:14,679 --> 00:15:17,679
you to review and be prepared in case there's an

253
00:15:17,799 --> 00:15:18,799
argument about.

254
00:15:18,679 --> 00:15:22,080
Speaker 1: One of them. I don't think there's gonna be. We've

255
00:15:22,120 --> 00:15:25,919
already kind of had the argument in regards to the photographs,

256
00:15:25,960 --> 00:15:30,200
and I also allowed that some photographs will be admitted

257
00:15:30,919 --> 00:15:33,879
with limiting instructions. But I just kind of want to

258
00:15:33,919 --> 00:15:37,600
make sure that I understand really what the jury is

259
00:15:37,600 --> 00:15:41,159
going to look at, so I could make that final determination.

260
00:15:41,320 --> 00:15:43,039
So kind of however you want to do. If you

261
00:15:43,080 --> 00:15:45,279
want to give you all the photographs, that's fine, or

262
00:15:45,519 --> 00:15:48,240
just some representative ones. I'm not going to hold you

263
00:15:48,399 --> 00:15:50,879
too if there's one that's a you know, a little

264
00:15:50,919 --> 00:15:53,279
different angle from some other one. But just so I

265
00:15:53,399 --> 00:15:56,480
have some idea kind of what we're gonna have to

266
00:15:56,559 --> 00:15:56,840
deal with.

267
00:15:57,799 --> 00:16:00,919
Speaker 5: So and I can bring in copies of the autopsy photos.

268
00:16:00,960 --> 00:16:06,559
Speaker 1: Is okay, that's fine, all right, thank you. The other

269
00:16:06,600 --> 00:16:09,080
thing we had talked about last time was that the

270
00:16:09,240 --> 00:16:12,759
three D model was I don't sure if that was

271
00:16:12,840 --> 00:16:14,960
done or if that's an issue now or.

272
00:16:15,360 --> 00:16:18,720
Speaker 5: It's almost complete. I'm expecting to Shawn A.

273
00:16:18,759 --> 00:16:20,720
Speaker 4: Rouci from our office has been working on them, and

274
00:16:20,759 --> 00:16:23,399
as soon as it's done, provide a copy to Defense

275
00:16:23,440 --> 00:16:24,759
Consulate report to look at.

276
00:16:25,279 --> 00:16:27,159
Speaker 5: But it's going to be a digital monitor that's on

277
00:16:27,320 --> 00:16:28,639
the screen, so.

278
00:16:28,720 --> 00:16:32,480
Speaker 1: It's a digital representation of the house. So if you

279
00:16:32,519 --> 00:16:36,799
could just make sure mister Reddington sees that copy, sees that,

280
00:16:36,960 --> 00:16:39,120
and then we can deal with that as we come

281
00:16:39,200 --> 00:16:39,919
from sure close.

282
00:16:40,279 --> 00:16:42,240
Speaker 3: I have no problem with the okat stuff.

283
00:16:42,320 --> 00:16:44,559
Speaker 1: I may have one myself, SA okay, all right, so

284
00:16:45,000 --> 00:16:49,279
we won't worry about that. The blood spatter emost. We're

285
00:16:49,320 --> 00:16:53,000
gonna take that up later. What other issues do we have.

286
00:16:55,200 --> 00:16:58,200
I know that there's one in regards some additional witnesses,

287
00:16:58,320 --> 00:17:01,879
but besides that, any other issues we need to take.

288
00:17:01,840 --> 00:17:08,799
Speaker 4: Up the comment Defense councils several purposed stipulations.

289
00:17:09,359 --> 00:17:11,480
Speaker 5: It would be helpful to resolve.

290
00:17:11,160 --> 00:17:16,200
Speaker 3: Those inetic people in a ministerial sense. Like somebody looked

291
00:17:16,200 --> 00:17:18,839
through scanning microscope and then they handed a slide. Is

292
00:17:18,960 --> 00:17:21,160
somebody else that put it in an envelope that somebody

293
00:17:21,200 --> 00:17:23,720
else looked at? I have no problem with that. I'm not,

294
00:17:24,559 --> 00:17:27,960
as you well know, with indicator that the mechanics, if

295
00:17:28,039 --> 00:17:32,720
you will, of the homicides and the actual event itself.

296
00:17:33,319 --> 00:17:36,079
We're not contesting. This is why you've already heard me

297
00:17:36,160 --> 00:17:38,920
complain about the autopsy photographs and all the cruise of

298
00:17:38,960 --> 00:17:42,440
stuff we're going to have to live through. Buts too,

299
00:17:43,480 --> 00:17:46,119
you have stipulations. I'm more than willing to stipulate to

300
00:17:46,240 --> 00:17:47,319
avoid having all.

301
00:17:47,240 --> 00:17:50,519
Speaker 4: These witnesses just so the courts to where they are

302
00:17:50,640 --> 00:17:54,359
witnesses as defense has described, mostly laboratory witnesses.

303
00:17:54,440 --> 00:17:56,720
Speaker 5: It would save calling thirty one people.

304
00:17:57,680 --> 00:17:59,440
Speaker 1: So all right, and that's kind of what I figure

305
00:17:59,440 --> 00:18:04,799
it was coming. So that's so I'll anticipate that there's

306
00:18:04,839 --> 00:18:06,880
going to be a fair amount of stipulations that will

307
00:18:06,920 --> 00:18:09,079
be done. I'm not gonna hold anybody to it at

308
00:18:09,119 --> 00:18:11,599
this point to do we get the specific language in it.

309
00:18:12,200 --> 00:18:15,680
Speaker 4: My only concern is that, in light of cala versus Gordon,

310
00:18:15,720 --> 00:18:17,720
I think there needs to be a call of way

311
00:18:17,720 --> 00:18:23,839
would defendant about the stipulation And I haven't done one myself.

312
00:18:23,519 --> 00:18:25,640
Speaker 5: So I don't have a model for the court. I'm

313
00:18:25,680 --> 00:18:28,279
not sure if other judges have done it at this point.

314
00:18:28,880 --> 00:18:31,279
Speaker 4: But that's something I think it would be something along

315
00:18:31,559 --> 00:18:35,559
the lines of other similar waivers of a constitutional right,

316
00:18:36,000 --> 00:18:36,680
but with.

317
00:18:36,839 --> 00:18:41,680
Speaker 1: Someone stipulation an element right. Yeah, so so well, I'll

318
00:18:41,759 --> 00:18:44,319
either borrow one or thraw one up. So I think

319
00:18:44,359 --> 00:18:48,400
that's a good idea, all right. I know that there

320
00:18:48,519 --> 00:18:51,960
was still a couple of remaining discovery motions that were

321
00:18:52,400 --> 00:18:55,839
kind of floating around. Do we need to address any

322
00:18:55,880 --> 00:18:58,759
of those? It's readygant.

323
00:19:00,799 --> 00:19:04,680
Speaker 3: Are you referring to kundance motion for relevant discovery?

324
00:19:04,960 --> 00:19:05,160
Speaker 1: Yes?

325
00:19:05,440 --> 00:19:09,240
Speaker 3: Okay, for the record, I would not run a paragraph

326
00:19:09,279 --> 00:19:12,039
when I'm looking for automatic mindatary discovery. I believe the

327
00:19:12,079 --> 00:19:17,640
government has been very effective in the providing me with

328
00:19:17,880 --> 00:19:21,799
uh discovery. I mean I when there's a witness, it's interview,

329
00:19:21,920 --> 00:19:24,160
they send me a copy of the interview. If your notes,

330
00:19:24,200 --> 00:19:25,920
they send me copies of the notes. So I don't

331
00:19:25,960 --> 00:19:26,440
have any.

332
00:19:26,319 --> 00:19:26,839
Speaker 1: Problem in that.

333
00:19:28,480 --> 00:19:32,319
Speaker 3: I don't believe that there are any unusual issues that

334
00:19:32,559 --> 00:19:37,839
have been flagged on this motion. And I would ask

335
00:19:37,920 --> 00:19:41,079
if the court would entertain allowing paragraph three, which is

336
00:19:41,240 --> 00:19:45,720
potentially exculpatory evidence, only because I know the case lack

337
00:19:45,920 --> 00:19:47,559
not that I doubt that they would provide me with

338
00:19:48,000 --> 00:19:50,720
exculpatory evidence, but I believe they have to have emotions

339
00:19:50,720 --> 00:19:54,400
allowed for the record to have it in play as

340
00:19:54,440 --> 00:19:58,119
far as the government's obligation that they recognize, and I

341
00:19:58,200 --> 00:20:01,480
respect the fact that they do and expect that they would.

342
00:20:01,920 --> 00:20:04,519
But nevertheless, I would ask if you allow one motion

343
00:20:04,680 --> 00:20:10,960
for its gulmentary evidence as well as motion for statements

344
00:20:11,079 --> 00:20:15,240
of the defendant. And again, I I don't anticipate that

345
00:20:15,319 --> 00:20:20,640
there are extensive statements of this clancy to law enforcement.

346
00:20:20,720 --> 00:20:24,079
I don't believe there are literally any, and I'm well

347
00:20:24,119 --> 00:20:28,759
aware I have the discs of the government's doctors interviewing her,

348
00:20:28,880 --> 00:20:30,799
so I've already got that. But I I would ask

349
00:20:30,799 --> 00:20:32,200
if you allow that motion as well.

350
00:20:33,279 --> 00:20:39,519
Speaker 4: Cometh So, if I'm understanding correctly from this motion, defense

351
00:20:39,680 --> 00:20:43,480
is just asking for the allowance of para uh paragraph

352
00:20:43,599 --> 00:20:46,759
three and then any statements of the defendant.

353
00:20:46,839 --> 00:20:47,440
Speaker 5: Is that correct?

354
00:20:47,519 --> 00:20:48,000
Speaker 3: That's correct.

355
00:20:48,440 --> 00:20:51,160
Speaker 5: Yeah, I have no objection to statements of the defendant.

356
00:20:51,279 --> 00:20:53,880
Speaker 4: We've provided those, and if any come to light, we

357
00:20:53,960 --> 00:20:55,119
will of course turn those over.

358
00:20:55,200 --> 00:21:00,240
Speaker 5: But I don't expect any. In terms of paragraph read.

359
00:21:01,119 --> 00:21:05,319
Speaker 4: My concern with paragraph there is the last paragraph, the

360
00:21:05,480 --> 00:21:08,640
last couple of sentences, where it says the new Room

361
00:21:08,720 --> 00:21:12,599
fourteen also requires a call waal to acquire of each witness, officer,

362
00:21:12,680 --> 00:21:15,640
and agent and agency as to whether they know of

363
00:21:15,880 --> 00:21:20,759
or possess any exculpatory evidence. And then that last sentence,

364
00:21:20,799 --> 00:21:23,000
the defendent request is quote order the callall to produce

365
00:21:23,039 --> 00:21:25,400
each and every inquiry in each and every response.

366
00:21:26,359 --> 00:21:29,279
Speaker 3: So I would narrow that if I could interrupt, but

367
00:21:29,279 --> 00:21:32,319
I apologize, I would narrow that too. In the event

368
00:21:32,559 --> 00:21:37,000
that there are statements that disclose exculpatory evidence, the government

369
00:21:37,000 --> 00:21:39,799
would that advice and defense. They don't have to notify

370
00:21:39,880 --> 00:21:41,519
me of every single person they've time.

371
00:21:41,640 --> 00:21:44,440
Speaker 1: Let's I need a note of that's one of the definition.

372
00:21:45,559 --> 00:21:49,039
I'm gonna make a suggestion maybe if if the two

373
00:21:49,119 --> 00:21:51,519
of the three of you can kind of come to

374
00:21:51,559 --> 00:21:54,400
an agreement as to that language, yes, and then not

375
00:21:54,559 --> 00:21:58,720
allow that as to make the endorsement that reflects the

376
00:21:59,079 --> 00:22:01,599
actual agreements of just kind of a blanket one that

377
00:22:02,000 --> 00:22:06,400
the parties may later disagree with what was meant. So

378
00:22:06,759 --> 00:22:11,400
I'll allow that pending the UH proposed language night.

379
00:22:12,319 --> 00:22:15,720
Speaker 4: So that would just be paragraph which I don't think

380
00:22:15,799 --> 00:22:17,200
is it's own paragraph them.

381
00:22:17,200 --> 00:22:20,400
Speaker 3: Here is that it would be yeah, just as the

382
00:22:20,480 --> 00:22:21,680
statements of the defendit in.

383
00:22:21,720 --> 00:22:26,119
Speaker 5: General is in general and no further action on the

384
00:22:26,240 --> 00:22:27,640
rest right as of now.

385
00:22:29,160 --> 00:22:32,119
Speaker 3: All right, run a business discovery motion filed as well,

386
00:22:32,240 --> 00:22:36,160
where the request of seventeen v two Yeah, uh looking

387
00:22:36,240 --> 00:22:39,839
for state uh police troopers local police detailed to sit

388
00:22:39,960 --> 00:22:44,240
at the defendant's hospital room. Government has provided me with

389
00:22:44,839 --> 00:22:49,200
today a large number of uh booty assignments and records

390
00:22:49,240 --> 00:22:51,319
and documents. I believe they're gonna provide me with the

391
00:22:51,400 --> 00:22:54,160
state police. But I I would say that the motion

392
00:22:54,359 --> 00:22:56,519
can be tabled un.

393
00:22:56,279 --> 00:22:58,599
Speaker 1: But uh so I'll take no action on it. I

394
00:22:58,640 --> 00:23:03,480
think that's uh plead number one one three rule for

395
00:23:03,920 --> 00:23:08,200
motion discovery under seventeen beach o, all right, so there'll

396
00:23:08,240 --> 00:23:14,400
be no action taken on that, Okay, alright, And then

397
00:23:15,480 --> 00:23:18,119
I think the only other kind of issue that we

398
00:23:18,200 --> 00:23:20,920
wanted that we need to take up is the defendant's

399
00:23:20,960 --> 00:23:24,559
motion that was filed. Oh no, there are a couple more, No,

400
00:23:24,720 --> 00:23:26,519
there are sorry.

401
00:23:26,440 --> 00:23:29,640
Speaker 3: Yeah, very briefly read as consulate already indicated in the

402
00:23:30,359 --> 00:23:34,000
the document titled Joint pre trial Memorandum. Oh yeah, okay,

403
00:23:34,160 --> 00:23:36,480
the government said in a greed statement of facts to

404
00:23:36,519 --> 00:23:40,599
be read to the jury basically allegend on January twenty fourth,

405
00:23:41,319 --> 00:23:45,279
twenty three, defendant strangled their three children, naming them in

406
00:23:45,359 --> 00:23:48,880
their ages was exercise bands in the basement of their home.

407
00:23:49,480 --> 00:23:53,160
Yet by murdering them with the liver, premeditation and extreme

408
00:23:53,240 --> 00:23:54,400
atrocity and cruelty.

409
00:23:54,640 --> 00:23:55,119
Speaker 1: And that's the.

410
00:23:55,240 --> 00:23:58,799
Speaker 3: Extent of the what would be referred to as the

411
00:23:59,039 --> 00:24:02,000
greed statement of fact by the government. I then submitted

412
00:24:02,039 --> 00:24:07,279
a request that RONO would consider adding uh paragraph that

413
00:24:07,440 --> 00:24:11,160
Lindsey Clancy denies the allegations that she is guilty of quote,

414
00:24:11,240 --> 00:24:14,680
murdering them with deliberate premeditation and with extreme atrocity and

415
00:24:14,759 --> 00:24:19,000
cruelty end quote, and notes that she has accepted responsibility

416
00:24:19,039 --> 00:24:21,400
for the acts resulting in the death of her children. However,

417
00:24:21,559 --> 00:24:24,359
was lacking criminal responsibility at the time of the acts

418
00:24:24,960 --> 00:24:28,440
as a result of post bottom depression psychosis and involuntary

419
00:24:28,480 --> 00:24:32,960
intoxication as a result of ingestion of numerous prescribed medications.

420
00:24:33,039 --> 00:24:36,240
Lindsay Glancy is there by alleging she is not guilty

421
00:24:36,319 --> 00:24:39,119
due to the lack of criminal responsibility. You will present

422
00:24:39,200 --> 00:24:42,480
what is referred to as the insanity defense, which I

423
00:24:42,599 --> 00:24:45,200
know was one of the questions that you would put

424
00:24:45,279 --> 00:24:46,440
in the question of.

425
00:24:48,359 --> 00:24:48,640
Speaker 1: Couple.

426
00:24:49,319 --> 00:24:51,799
Speaker 5: You Runnerstroy, you do I have a copy.

427
00:24:51,559 --> 00:24:53,640
Speaker 1: That is it is it submitted to me?

428
00:24:53,799 --> 00:24:57,039
Speaker 5: We exud altim copy of the Joint pre Trump.

429
00:24:57,640 --> 00:24:58,400
Speaker 1: The Joint pre Trump.

430
00:24:58,480 --> 00:25:01,160
Speaker 4: I'm just even a fast said the beginning the proposed

431
00:25:01,160 --> 00:25:02,359
statement of Factorconwall.

432
00:25:03,640 --> 00:25:07,480
Speaker 1: I look for mister Reddington's persion because I know I said,

433
00:25:09,799 --> 00:25:12,440
h yeah, go ahead, and sprague I'm sorry.

434
00:25:12,599 --> 00:25:15,039
Speaker 4: So the komos would object to the paragraph as a whole,

435
00:25:15,119 --> 00:25:18,079
we would not object to the statement lindsay Clincy denies

436
00:25:18,079 --> 00:25:21,279
the allegations and that she's alleging she's not guilty due

437
00:25:21,279 --> 00:25:22,759
to lack of criminal responsibility.

438
00:25:23,519 --> 00:25:26,079
Speaker 5: But the rest would have to come in either through

439
00:25:26,240 --> 00:25:28,599
her testifying or other witnesses testifying.

440
00:25:30,119 --> 00:25:32,400
Speaker 4: Saying that she denies the allegations, that she's guilty of

441
00:25:32,480 --> 00:25:35,640
murdering them with deliberate premeditation and extreme atrocity and cruelty.

442
00:25:35,759 --> 00:25:38,880
Kind of flies in the face of the statements earlier

443
00:25:38,960 --> 00:25:43,480
that what happened is not in dispute. So that is

444
00:25:43,559 --> 00:25:47,039
the reason for having the evidence about what happened to Cora,

445
00:25:47,200 --> 00:25:51,119
Dawson and Callen and including the autopsy photos, because that

446
00:25:51,160 --> 00:25:53,880
all goes to extreme atrocity and cruelty.

447
00:25:53,839 --> 00:25:56,960
Speaker 5: And deliberate premeditation, and then the rest where it notes

448
00:25:57,000 --> 00:25:58,519
that she's accepted responsibility.

449
00:25:58,599 --> 00:26:01,720
Speaker 4: Again, that would be putting evidence before the jury or

450
00:26:01,799 --> 00:26:02,680
statements before.

451
00:26:02,440 --> 00:26:05,200
Speaker 5: The jury that may or may not ever be in evidence.

452
00:26:06,200 --> 00:26:10,039
Speaker 4: So I think the standard she denies the allegations and

453
00:26:10,119 --> 00:26:12,400
then including what the defense is, which I usually object to,

454
00:26:12,519 --> 00:26:14,640
but I'm not in this case because it's it's public knowledge.

455
00:26:15,359 --> 00:26:16,279
Speaker 5: So those two.

456
00:26:16,200 --> 00:26:18,559
Speaker 4: Statements I think would be sufficient, and I don't think

457
00:26:18,599 --> 00:26:19,640
the rest would be appropriate.

458
00:26:22,000 --> 00:26:26,960
Speaker 1: What I've done in past cases like this, I think

459
00:26:27,000 --> 00:26:29,920
the one we did a couple of years ago was

460
00:26:30,559 --> 00:26:32,720
basically in the statement of the case after with the

461
00:26:32,759 --> 00:26:37,880
Comwell's allegations, to say something about the question before you

462
00:26:37,920 --> 00:26:40,519
whether or not misclaims who was criminally responsible? If she

463
00:26:40,640 --> 00:26:44,440
lacked criminal responsibility, the prosecution has the burden of proof.

464
00:26:44,839 --> 00:26:47,839
The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she

465
00:26:47,960 --> 00:26:50,400
was criminally responsible at the time that she killed her

466
00:26:50,440 --> 00:26:54,640
three children. Any objection to that, I do.

467
00:26:54,680 --> 00:26:57,319
Speaker 4: Object to giving an instruction such as that, and that

468
00:26:57,720 --> 00:27:01,440
the case laws states that we're not required to prove

469
00:27:01,680 --> 00:27:02,079
that she.

470
00:27:03,920 --> 00:27:06,559
Speaker 5: Had criminal responsibility until the defense.

471
00:27:06,400 --> 00:27:10,279
Speaker 4: Raises it, So at that point, at the beginning of

472
00:27:10,359 --> 00:27:13,039
the case, it hasn't been raised. I'm not objecting to

473
00:27:13,640 --> 00:27:18,400
it that that's her defense, that she lacked criminal responsibility,

474
00:27:18,599 --> 00:27:21,079
but I object to an instruction at the beginning when

475
00:27:21,119 --> 00:27:22,240
that evidence hasn't come in.

476
00:27:23,039 --> 00:27:25,640
Speaker 5: I expect it to come in, but things change during trial.

477
00:27:25,880 --> 00:27:30,000
You never know. But it's the same as with self

478
00:27:30,039 --> 00:27:30,880
defense instructions.

479
00:27:30,920 --> 00:27:32,640
Speaker 4: I object to those at the beginning of the case

480
00:27:32,720 --> 00:27:35,559
because it's dependent on evidence that comes in during the trial.

481
00:27:35,839 --> 00:27:39,039
Speaker 1: But then, how what's the basis then for asking the

482
00:27:39,160 --> 00:27:44,920
jury in the impalement questions about their position regarding the

483
00:27:45,039 --> 00:27:47,599
defense of criminal responsibility.

484
00:27:47,119 --> 00:27:49,960
Speaker 4: Because like self defense, we expect that will be an issue,

485
00:27:50,720 --> 00:27:52,319
so we want to know if it's going to affect

486
00:27:52,319 --> 00:27:54,920
our ability to be fair and impartial. But I don't

487
00:27:54,920 --> 00:27:58,079
think the instruction comes until it actually becomes an issue.

488
00:28:00,720 --> 00:28:03,279
Speaker 5: Yeah, I haven't say it supports discusion.

489
00:28:03,759 --> 00:28:07,920
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'll take a look at him. But just so everybody,

490
00:28:08,000 --> 00:28:10,599
I'm probably gonna give something similar to to what I

491
00:28:10,680 --> 00:28:13,799
gave what I just kind of read out, just to

492
00:28:13,880 --> 00:28:16,880
kind of tell him that this is the issue. You know,

493
00:28:17,079 --> 00:28:20,160
this is the defendi's position that that she was not

494
00:28:20,279 --> 00:28:23,279
criminally responsible. This is the carm wos position is that

495
00:28:23,839 --> 00:28:27,440
she committed a crime, and so it'll be something along

496
00:28:27,519 --> 00:28:32,079
that line, and I'll show everybody before we read it

497
00:28:32,160 --> 00:28:35,279
to the jury, so everybody can kind of have some

498
00:28:35,359 --> 00:28:38,599
additional feedback. There'll be something similar to that. I bet

499
00:28:39,200 --> 00:28:43,359
all right, what else any other issues before we get

500
00:28:43,400 --> 00:28:43,640
to the.

501
00:28:45,119 --> 00:28:47,240
Speaker 3: Well you have requests for the court to consider. I

502
00:28:47,279 --> 00:28:49,400
don't know if you have an emotion to see questration

503
00:28:49,599 --> 00:28:52,519
or the jury. You didn't have that?

504
00:28:53,400 --> 00:29:00,279
Speaker 1: No, Okay, have you seen this come up your Yeah?

505
00:29:03,240 --> 00:29:05,119
Speaker 3: Like I say, I know that when we followed, we

506
00:29:05,240 --> 00:29:07,119
sent them to the DA, we send them to the court.

507
00:29:07,240 --> 00:29:09,759
Speaker 1: So no, I have to follow my sort of it

508
00:29:09,960 --> 00:29:10,519
was sent to me.

509
00:29:10,920 --> 00:29:13,119
Speaker 3: I had seen this one, so the emotions elevens.

510
00:29:13,359 --> 00:29:15,000
Speaker 1: No, but I like to just so I don't and

511
00:29:15,079 --> 00:29:18,519
so I don't blame somebody else. It was Citty sitting

512
00:29:18,599 --> 00:29:22,759
on my desk. Well, it's right, call EU on this.

513
00:29:24,160 --> 00:29:27,480
Speaker 3: You're run right, basically, can it can be very brief.

514
00:29:28,599 --> 00:29:32,119
This is, as I indicated, a very unusual case emotionally.

515
00:29:32,400 --> 00:29:36,359
U factually government's estimating six to eight weeks for a trial,

516
00:29:36,519 --> 00:29:39,920
maybe less with the stipulation. Nevertheless, it would be a

517
00:29:40,079 --> 00:29:45,319
huge imposition on jurors. There has been extensive pre tro publicity,

518
00:29:45,359 --> 00:29:47,680
as you know from the emotion for a change of

519
00:29:47,759 --> 00:29:50,880
venue which a round I heard and today which would

520
00:29:50,920 --> 00:29:54,079
be renewed at the time of the impanelment depending on

521
00:29:54,599 --> 00:29:56,920
where the jurors reacts to the questions in the sidebar

522
00:29:57,599 --> 00:30:03,319
individual idea. So my can concern is that with all

523
00:30:03,400 --> 00:30:08,240
of those issues, and I understand that it's unusual nowadays

524
00:30:08,400 --> 00:30:12,519
we don't really do sea questration of jurors, I think

525
00:30:12,599 --> 00:30:16,079
this is a very unusual case that may warrant that,

526
00:30:16,480 --> 00:30:21,079
and even if it's a possibility during the course of

527
00:30:21,160 --> 00:30:24,039
the trial, I think that the court should at least

528
00:30:24,079 --> 00:30:27,680
flag that issue for the potential jurors for them to

529
00:30:27,799 --> 00:30:31,519
factor that into their own determination of their availability. So

530
00:30:31,680 --> 00:30:33,039
that's why I foiled the emotion.

531
00:30:33,680 --> 00:30:36,279
Speaker 5: Come up and I come up with jets of the motion.

532
00:30:37,359 --> 00:30:39,839
I think that the court will instruct well, I know

533
00:30:39,880 --> 00:30:40,920
that the court will instruct the.

534
00:30:40,960 --> 00:30:43,240
Speaker 4: Jurors not to go on social media, not to read

535
00:30:43,240 --> 00:30:45,359
about the case, not to pay attention to any of that.

536
00:30:45,759 --> 00:30:48,759
Speaker 5: In addition, the court typically ask the questions every morning.

537
00:30:49,359 --> 00:30:52,200
Speaker 4: If they've been able to follow those instructions, they're presumed

538
00:30:52,240 --> 00:30:55,160
to follow those instructions. So I don't think seat frustration

539
00:30:55,400 --> 00:30:57,920
is necessary, and I don't think it would be necessary

540
00:30:58,079 --> 00:30:59,079
to ask.

541
00:30:59,039 --> 00:31:02,000
Speaker 5: Them about something that never happened in the case that

542
00:31:02,119 --> 00:31:02,759
be impediment.

543
00:31:03,519 --> 00:31:08,960
Speaker 1: All right, I'm gonna deny this. I will said, I'm

544
00:31:09,000 --> 00:31:12,039
going to ask the jury if they've heard of anything before,

545
00:31:12,079 --> 00:31:14,920
if it's affected their ability to be fear and the parts.

546
00:31:15,000 --> 00:31:17,599
I'm gonna ask them every day whether or not they've

547
00:31:17,680 --> 00:31:21,799
seen anything, and also go instruct them not to view

548
00:31:21,920 --> 00:31:26,640
any articles or social media in regards to this during

549
00:31:26,720 --> 00:31:28,920
the course of that, and I'll follow up every day

550
00:31:29,000 --> 00:31:32,359
to make sure they follow those instructions. So I'm gonna

551
00:31:32,839 --> 00:31:34,599
deny this motion.

552
00:31:37,039 --> 00:31:41,000
Speaker 3: No objection retirement tonight. And I think there's one more.

553
00:31:40,839 --> 00:31:43,759
Speaker 1: Emotion, real it? All right? All right, let's see the

554
00:31:44,640 --> 00:31:45,119
last motion.

555
00:31:45,400 --> 00:31:48,400
Speaker 3: Last motion you before we get into the jury questionnaire.

556
00:31:48,480 --> 00:31:51,759
I think would be capture defendant's motion for jury instruction.

557
00:31:53,759 --> 00:31:56,240
Speaker 1: If you have that, yeah, keep it down.

558
00:31:57,279 --> 00:32:00,519
Speaker 3: I can give you this if you don't, sorry, when

559
00:32:00,559 --> 00:32:03,640
you give the instructions to the jury on the law

560
00:32:04,000 --> 00:32:07,200
after we've picked the jury, and I believe you do

561
00:32:07,319 --> 00:32:11,000
it before openings in light of the fact that it's

562
00:32:11,480 --> 00:32:15,640
obvious that lack of criminal responsibility is the defense is

563
00:32:15,720 --> 00:32:19,920
the central bedrock of the defense in the case, I

564
00:32:19,960 --> 00:32:23,039
would ask that the court would, in addition to instructing

565
00:32:23,119 --> 00:32:26,759
the jury as you do in a generic sense about

566
00:32:26,839 --> 00:32:30,519
proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that the court would also

567
00:32:30,960 --> 00:32:33,519
instruct the jury that, as it relates to the burden

568
00:32:33,599 --> 00:32:37,319
of proof in the unusual situation where you're dealing with

569
00:32:37,519 --> 00:32:42,960
lack of criminal responsibility, that it is not the defendant's

570
00:32:43,000 --> 00:32:47,160
burden to prove that she was lacking criminal responsibility, but

571
00:32:47,319 --> 00:32:51,799
in fact, upon presentation of evidence, it's the government's burden

572
00:32:51,880 --> 00:32:54,599
to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was not

573
00:32:55,720 --> 00:32:58,359
acting as a result of a mental disease or defect.

574
00:32:58,640 --> 00:33:00,279
So I'm just asking that you would add that to

575
00:33:00,400 --> 00:33:04,039
the generic instructions you're under.

576
00:33:04,119 --> 00:33:07,160
Speaker 6: Similarly to the argument that the Commonwealth was objecting to

577
00:33:07,519 --> 00:33:10,160
the criminal responsibility being mentioned in the statement of facts,

578
00:33:10,160 --> 00:33:13,799
we would also object to the preliminary instruction full instruction

579
00:33:13,839 --> 00:33:19,480
about criminal responsibility because, as my sister said, it is

580
00:33:20,240 --> 00:33:22,319
the defendant still has to raise it, and they have

581
00:33:22,440 --> 00:33:24,759
to raise it not just by saying it in an

582
00:33:24,759 --> 00:33:27,480
opening statement. They have to raise it by expert testimony,

583
00:33:27,880 --> 00:33:31,160
laywitness testimony or the actual facts of the case, and

584
00:33:31,279 --> 00:33:34,559
so that isn't done until the cases underway, and preliminary

585
00:33:34,599 --> 00:33:37,519
instruction is it comes well before that. So that is

586
00:33:37,880 --> 00:33:41,680
relying on Commonwealth versus Santiago forty five Mass. Four sixteen,

587
00:33:41,759 --> 00:33:47,240
a twenty twenty case that reiterates the instruction isn't necessarily

588
00:33:47,920 --> 00:33:50,400
need to be given in a preliminary arm or in

589
00:33:50,480 --> 00:33:53,640
that case, for it was actually for a jury instruction

590
00:33:53,720 --> 00:33:54,920
with the conclusion of the case if.

591
00:33:54,880 --> 00:33:55,799
Speaker 5: The evidence wasn't raised.

592
00:33:55,839 --> 00:33:58,559
Speaker 6: But I would suggest that the idea is even stronger

593
00:33:58,720 --> 00:34:01,640
that if we haven't even presented the jury without anything,

594
00:34:01,799 --> 00:34:04,920
then they shouldn't be preliminary instruct preliminarily instructed on it.

595
00:34:05,240 --> 00:34:07,079
If your honor wasn't client to give it, because it

596
00:34:07,200 --> 00:34:10,239
is a discretionary thing, I would ask that you stick

597
00:34:10,280 --> 00:34:13,039
to the language of the model and not how counsel

598
00:34:13,119 --> 00:34:17,119
phrased it, because as you're familiar, the actual instruction when

599
00:34:17,159 --> 00:34:19,639
it comes to what the Commonwealth must prove with a

600
00:34:19,719 --> 00:34:23,559
criminal responsibility issue is not just whether we can say

601
00:34:23,639 --> 00:34:25,920
that they don't have a mental disease or defect, because

602
00:34:27,239 --> 00:34:30,360
we may the evidence might show that, but that is

603
00:34:30,480 --> 00:34:30,760
not the.

604
00:34:30,880 --> 00:34:32,000
Speaker 5: Requirement for the jury.

605
00:34:32,280 --> 00:34:34,679
Speaker 6: If there is a mental disease or defect, then the

606
00:34:34,719 --> 00:34:38,159
Commonwealth has to prove the other two prongs of the

607
00:34:39,079 --> 00:34:42,079
criminal responsibility statue. So the way it's phrased in the motion,

608
00:34:42,199 --> 00:34:44,000
I'd ask you not adopt that language, and that you

609
00:34:44,039 --> 00:34:45,960
stick to the model if you are inclined to offer it,

610
00:34:46,000 --> 00:34:47,880
but we would object to the giving of it.

611
00:34:48,400 --> 00:34:50,880
Speaker 1: What if I instructed the jury in a sense, almost

612
00:34:50,920 --> 00:34:57,199
like hypothetically, that it's he anticipated that the defensive criminal

613
00:34:57,239 --> 00:35:00,880
responsibility is going to be raised. If that's raised, this

614
00:35:01,079 --> 00:35:01,840
is what the law is.

615
00:35:05,119 --> 00:35:06,199
Speaker 5: Well, I would.

616
00:35:07,880 --> 00:35:10,119
Speaker 6: I would suggest that we don't want to be caught

617
00:35:10,119 --> 00:35:12,760
in a burden shifting situation on a preliminary instruction.

618
00:35:12,960 --> 00:35:15,360
Speaker 5: So maybe that language is a little bit too close.

619
00:35:15,840 --> 00:35:18,639
Speaker 6: I think it's either your honor gives it as it

620
00:35:18,880 --> 00:35:23,079
is in the model in the preliminary as a preliminary instruction,

621
00:35:23,639 --> 00:35:26,199
or it's not to be given and just to be

622
00:35:26,239 --> 00:35:27,760
addressed at the conclusion of the case.

623
00:35:28,000 --> 00:35:32,199
Speaker 1: I'll think I generally give it. I understand the calmost position,

624
00:35:32,320 --> 00:35:36,320
but I generally think it's a good Well, I'll just

625
00:35:36,519 --> 00:35:38,559
leave it at that. I generally give that. So I'll

626
00:35:38,559 --> 00:35:40,000
take a look at it, but I generally give the

627
00:35:40,039 --> 00:35:50,079
model language that's suggested, So all right, all right, And

628
00:35:50,199 --> 00:35:54,639
then there's one last motion, uh that was filed yesterday

629
00:35:54,840 --> 00:35:56,840
the kalmal to have an opportunity to review that.

630
00:35:58,360 --> 00:36:04,000
Speaker 5: I briefly looked it over. I would suggest that we

631
00:36:04,079 --> 00:36:04,840
shouldn't even.

632
00:36:04,800 --> 00:36:09,639
Speaker 4: Broach this motion in that it violates Rule fourteen discovery

633
00:36:09,760 --> 00:36:10,599
and that these.

634
00:36:10,519 --> 00:36:12,519
Speaker 5: Individuals have been identified by.

635
00:36:14,199 --> 00:36:18,800
Speaker 4: Initials only with no other information, no statements of the witnesses,

636
00:36:18,920 --> 00:36:20,039
no indication.

637
00:36:20,199 --> 00:36:23,519
Speaker 5: Of what these witnesses have to offer the background. And

638
00:36:23,599 --> 00:36:25,599
it's one week prior to trial. So it asked that

639
00:36:25,639 --> 00:36:27,639
we that it just be denied on its face.

640
00:36:29,000 --> 00:36:35,599
Speaker 1: Well, I understand that, but it's been raised. So I'm

641
00:36:35,639 --> 00:36:41,159
gonna hear from the calmwealth, and I'll hear from there,

642
00:36:41,840 --> 00:36:44,000
from the here, from the defender versus then from the

643
00:36:44,039 --> 00:36:47,159
call wealth. I'm sorry, and then I may have to

644
00:36:47,239 --> 00:36:50,280
take it on the revisement myself, and it may be

645
00:36:51,199 --> 00:36:53,119
the argument that there is just not enough fear for

646
00:36:53,199 --> 00:36:56,159
me to make a decision, is there? But I think

647
00:36:56,239 --> 00:37:00,079
I want to give the defendant new opportunity to argue this. So,

648
00:37:00,719 --> 00:37:04,679
mister Reddington, this is the emotion eliminade to permit testimony

649
00:37:04,760 --> 00:37:09,920
from witnesses. We have themselves been, according to the motion,

650
00:37:10,119 --> 00:37:15,760
victimized by the medical system regarding the issues of postpartum

651
00:37:15,840 --> 00:37:18,000
depression and postpartum psychosis.

652
00:37:18,159 --> 00:37:21,639
Speaker 3: Yes, you're the think runner. As I say in the affidavit,

653
00:37:21,760 --> 00:37:25,480
as you can well imagine, I have been contacted by many,

654
00:37:25,719 --> 00:37:30,760
many people who have, in a very moving emotional fashion,

655
00:37:30,920 --> 00:37:36,840
advised me of these horrific issues that they've been dealing with,

656
00:37:37,559 --> 00:37:45,760
postpartum depression, postpartum psychosis, hearing the auditory commands having intrusive

657
00:37:45,880 --> 00:37:50,480
thoughts to hurt or kill their partner or their children,

658
00:37:50,760 --> 00:37:57,960
infanticide as a result of postpattum psychosis, medication issues contributing

659
00:37:58,039 --> 00:38:02,119
to the postpatum depression, post partis of psychosis. And it's

660
00:38:02,199 --> 00:38:06,480
so easy for us as a society to say, in

661
00:38:06,599 --> 00:38:09,519
a troubling case like this, oh my god, she's guilty,

662
00:38:10,199 --> 00:38:13,719
throw away the key, put her in jail, and just

663
00:38:13,800 --> 00:38:16,199
be done with it, because it makes everybody feel better.

664
00:38:16,280 --> 00:38:19,280
It's a feel good reaction that, Okay, somebody has been

665
00:38:19,400 --> 00:38:22,599
punished because of doing a very bad thing. But because

666
00:38:22,679 --> 00:38:26,519
we know when you're dealing with the issues of lack

667
00:38:26,559 --> 00:38:30,039
of criminal responsibility, I don't like the term insanity, but nevertheless,

668
00:38:30,679 --> 00:38:33,440
when you're dealing with somebody who is suffering from a

669
00:38:33,559 --> 00:38:39,679
medical a defect or a disease, and they have actually

670
00:38:39,880 --> 00:38:45,000
experienced something that is so outside that ken, if you will,

671
00:38:45,599 --> 00:38:49,800
of jurors, of normal people. For us to believe that

672
00:38:50,920 --> 00:38:55,519
somebody's hearing voices, the initial reaction from any one of us,

673
00:38:55,599 --> 00:38:58,639
I think in this court we become you're not hearing voices.

674
00:38:58,719 --> 00:39:00,519
What are you talking about? You're making this, You're trying

675
00:39:00,559 --> 00:39:05,679
to avoid responsibility. But it is true, and it happens,

676
00:39:05,840 --> 00:39:12,920
and it is an affliction that people experience themselves, as

677
00:39:13,039 --> 00:39:18,480
to postpodum depression, psychosis, the concerns and the fear that

678
00:39:18,599 --> 00:39:21,960
a woman has, and I say as a woman has

679
00:39:22,480 --> 00:39:25,239
because guys don't know about this. You know, we're so

680
00:39:25,440 --> 00:39:27,719
quick to go out and we're mighty and strong, we

681
00:39:27,840 --> 00:39:30,880
have many beers, and we're real quick to say throw

682
00:39:30,920 --> 00:39:33,719
away the key in it. But a woman who has

683
00:39:33,840 --> 00:39:38,800
suffered and has put up with this affliction should be

684
00:39:38,880 --> 00:39:43,840
able to testify and say, probably in an emotionally charged fashion,

685
00:39:44,039 --> 00:39:48,719
very credibly, I too have heard these command voices. I

686
00:39:48,920 --> 00:39:53,920
too acted on the command voices. I too have had insomnia.

687
00:39:54,079 --> 00:39:57,440
I too have had hedonism where I don't even care

688
00:39:57,519 --> 00:40:01,239
if I live or die. I have no motion, I

689
00:40:01,400 --> 00:40:04,840
can't feel, I can't laugh, I can't love, I can't hate.

690
00:40:05,880 --> 00:40:08,679
And I think that that is important now before I

691
00:40:09,840 --> 00:40:15,960
disclose the identity of these people. It seems to me

692
00:40:16,159 --> 00:40:19,599
that what I have to do is present the general

693
00:40:19,800 --> 00:40:25,679
legal issue to you as a preliminary gatekeeper, almost where

694
00:40:25,840 --> 00:40:31,920
you would say, hypothetically, I think upon sufficiency of proof,

695
00:40:33,440 --> 00:40:36,760
it is admissible, and I am inclined to the judge

696
00:40:37,119 --> 00:40:40,639
to allow that evidence before a jury, at which point

697
00:40:40,719 --> 00:40:43,199
I would then, of course disclose the identity of the

698
00:40:43,280 --> 00:40:46,239
people with their knowledge and consent the medical backgrounds, and

699
00:40:46,840 --> 00:40:49,639
the government could then send their cops out to interrogate them,

700
00:40:49,760 --> 00:40:51,719
or intimidate them, or talk to them, or do whatever

701
00:40:51,760 --> 00:40:53,119
they want to do. But if they get on that

702
00:40:53,239 --> 00:40:57,920
witness stand, they have credible evidence to give. So it's

703
00:40:57,960 --> 00:41:01,320
a two part I can't really give their names and

704
00:41:01,519 --> 00:41:04,960
addresses without knowing. You may say, as a matter of law,

705
00:41:05,599 --> 00:41:10,159
it's not admissible. Somebody's individual experience with a narcotic, with

706
00:41:10,280 --> 00:41:13,199
a drug with a disease or a defect is not

707
00:41:13,440 --> 00:41:17,679
admissible in a sense of the specifics of a trial.

708
00:41:17,719 --> 00:41:19,440
And if that's the case, then it shuts down the

709
00:41:19,519 --> 00:41:21,079
issue and that's the end of it. But I had

710
00:41:21,119 --> 00:41:25,960
to raise the issue preliminarily, Thank your honor.

711
00:41:27,400 --> 00:41:30,719
Speaker 4: We'll incorporate what I've said before about the cruel fourteen

712
00:41:30,840 --> 00:41:32,320
and the lack of notice in the one.

713
00:41:32,239 --> 00:41:35,400
Speaker 5: Week prior to trial. But also defense counsel cites.

714
00:41:35,199 --> 00:41:37,480
Speaker 4: No rule of evidence that would allow for the admission

715
00:41:37,480 --> 00:41:41,559
of layperson testimony about these issues. These cites too the

716
00:41:41,679 --> 00:41:44,960
abatted Woman's Statute, But in that statute itself it refers

717
00:41:45,039 --> 00:41:49,840
to expert testimony, not laypersons, saying I had this experience,

718
00:41:49,920 --> 00:41:52,039
so that the defendant must have as well. And then

719
00:41:52,079 --> 00:41:54,079
I think what we come to is it becomes more

720
00:41:54,119 --> 00:41:58,599
prejudicial than probative in that say, you allow sixteen people

721
00:41:58,679 --> 00:42:00,679
to come in and testify it to that then the

722
00:42:00,760 --> 00:42:04,519
kamawalth gets to rebut that with their own witnesses, women

723
00:42:04,599 --> 00:42:08,320
who suffered from postpartum depression and psychosis, who did not

724
00:42:08,480 --> 00:42:11,360
kill their children, who locked themselves in a room to

725
00:42:11,480 --> 00:42:13,800
keep themselves from harming their children, who got in a

726
00:42:13,920 --> 00:42:17,119
car and drove away so they didn't harm their children.

727
00:42:17,639 --> 00:42:19,639
And so then it becomes a trial within a trial,

728
00:42:20,159 --> 00:42:25,440
and it's more prejudicial than probative. There's no rule allowing

729
00:42:25,480 --> 00:42:27,840
the admission, and it would delay the trial.

730
00:42:28,320 --> 00:42:30,039
Speaker 5: And i'll honesty because then.

731
00:42:29,960 --> 00:42:32,440
Speaker 4: We would be filing a motion for discovery on these

732
00:42:32,519 --> 00:42:36,000
witnesses their medical records, having them interviewed by police, which

733
00:42:36,000 --> 00:42:36,679
would take time.

734
00:42:36,960 --> 00:42:38,199
Speaker 5: So I would object to this motion.

735
00:42:38,480 --> 00:42:40,239
Speaker 3: I'd like to know who these people are that would

736
00:42:40,239 --> 00:42:42,400
walk on themselves in rooms and getting in their cast

737
00:42:42,639 --> 00:42:44,000
were killing or rooting their.

738
00:42:43,960 --> 00:42:45,679
Speaker 5: Trophslet's go on Facebook, They're all over.

739
00:42:45,920 --> 00:42:48,519
Speaker 1: But isn't that the whole problem? I think what the

740
00:42:48,599 --> 00:42:51,679
karma is saying that this isn't just the trial within

741
00:42:51,760 --> 00:42:54,480
a trial, it would be sixteen trials within this trial.

742
00:42:55,760 --> 00:43:00,760
I understand the argument, especially the kind of comparison to

743
00:43:00,920 --> 00:43:04,639
the Better Women's syndrome, But is that case those cases developed.

744
00:43:04,679 --> 00:43:07,920
I'm sure this reading to may remember as those cases

745
00:43:08,800 --> 00:43:11,679
that became more and more admissible. It really hinged a

746
00:43:11,760 --> 00:43:17,119
lot upon the testimony of experts, and in this case,

747
00:43:17,599 --> 00:43:20,880
I anticipate there's gonna be experts. They're going to talk

748
00:43:20,960 --> 00:43:26,159
about the reality of this postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis.

749
00:43:26,920 --> 00:43:32,639
So that's coming out and these are testimony, they'll come

750
00:43:33,000 --> 00:43:35,159
from the experts. I think on both sides it doesn't

751
00:43:35,199 --> 00:43:41,320
seem like there's a question of whether or not postpartum

752
00:43:42,440 --> 00:43:46,679
depression or psychosis is real. I mean both all the

753
00:43:46,760 --> 00:43:52,000
experts seem to agree that it's real. So because of

754
00:43:52,199 --> 00:43:57,360
the ability to get the probative part of what those

755
00:43:57,440 --> 00:44:01,440
women would bring to the court, the experts can give that,

756
00:44:02,719 --> 00:44:06,559
and so I'm going to deny the motion at this time.

757
00:44:07,800 --> 00:44:11,000
Anything else we need to address come up.

758
00:44:11,320 --> 00:44:14,119
Speaker 4: I just think on the questionnaire, I was looking over

759
00:44:14,199 --> 00:44:17,800
the questions, I don't have any objections. I only request

760
00:44:17,840 --> 00:44:21,719
an addition on number two. It asks about a family member,

761
00:44:21,760 --> 00:44:24,519
a close friend being diagnosed with close part of depression, depression,

762
00:44:25,039 --> 00:44:28,559
or generalized anxiety disorder, and also asked to include bipolar disorder,

763
00:44:28,599 --> 00:44:30,719
as most of the experts in this case have diagnosed

764
00:44:30,760 --> 00:44:34,119
the defendant with bipolar disorder, so I think it'd be

765
00:44:34,119 --> 00:44:36,000
important to have that information.

766
00:44:36,519 --> 00:44:41,639
Speaker 3: Anything else in regards question Anya.

767
00:44:41,639 --> 00:44:45,039
Speaker 4: And also Jo, there's no question on here regarding medications,

768
00:44:45,199 --> 00:44:51,480
whether people have any experience with psychiatric medications and whether

769
00:44:51,559 --> 00:44:53,599
that would affect their ability to be fair and impartial

770
00:44:54,039 --> 00:44:56,000
either experience or views about.

771
00:44:58,000 --> 00:44:59,800
Speaker 1: A right mis ready to.

772
00:45:02,360 --> 00:45:04,000
Speaker 3: First of all, if I could just hack it back

773
00:45:04,079 --> 00:45:07,119
to the orders that you've given on the emotions in eliminae,

774
00:45:07,159 --> 00:45:09,280
and I don't mean it seems paranoid, but you, I'm

775
00:45:09,320 --> 00:45:14,000
sure understand the appellate courts in Massachusetts have repeatedly stated

776
00:45:14,079 --> 00:45:16,960
that on emotion and eliminae, if the Defense Council does

777
00:45:17,119 --> 00:45:20,119
not object, you're waiving it. So I just want to

778
00:45:20,159 --> 00:45:22,800
make sure number one for the Appeals Court if necessary,

779
00:45:22,920 --> 00:45:27,360
or the SJC, I object And is it my understanding

780
00:45:27,440 --> 00:45:30,239
that any further objections I don't have to keep objecting

781
00:45:30,320 --> 00:45:32,039
because I respect your ruling that I.

782
00:45:32,079 --> 00:45:35,800
Speaker 1: Don't have to come up. I have no problems with that.

783
00:45:35,920 --> 00:45:38,599
I think it's especially it's clear that the boat the

784
00:45:38,679 --> 00:45:41,800
issues were raised on the motions eliminate, I've ruled on them,

785
00:45:43,360 --> 00:45:46,800
and I think it doesn't need to be a recurring

786
00:45:47,800 --> 00:45:48,679
objection on those.

787
00:45:49,079 --> 00:45:51,440
Speaker 4: I would agree for the record your order that if

788
00:45:52,000 --> 00:45:55,039
whichever party was affected by the denial of the objection,

789
00:45:55,199 --> 00:45:56,000
is there okay?

790
00:45:56,159 --> 00:45:57,760
Speaker 1: All right?

791
00:45:57,800 --> 00:46:02,039
Speaker 3: Addressing the questionnaire you runner, I may I do. It's

792
00:46:02,280 --> 00:46:06,159
an interesting issue that we're dealing with the questions that

793
00:46:06,440 --> 00:46:11,000
have been requested, have you, a family member or close

794
00:46:11,119 --> 00:46:16,719
friend ever been diagnosed with postpartum depression, depression, or generalized

795
00:46:16,840 --> 00:46:22,280
anxiety disorder. The next question is skipping over the NGA

796
00:46:23,119 --> 00:46:26,519
number four, have you, a family member or a close

797
00:46:26,599 --> 00:46:30,519
friend ever been diagnosed and or treated for mental illness

798
00:46:31,239 --> 00:46:38,000
for condition? And then going down to number six, have

799
00:46:38,199 --> 00:46:40,719
you a family member or a close friend had an

800
00:46:40,800 --> 00:46:45,360
experience with a psychiatrist, psychologist, a mental health facility that

801
00:46:45,440 --> 00:46:48,440
would make it difficult for you to be fair and

802
00:46:48,559 --> 00:46:53,519
impartial in this case? And finally number nine, do you

803
00:46:53,679 --> 00:46:57,480
believe that a person's mental illness should not be considered

804
00:46:58,039 --> 00:47:03,119
when determining their guilt or innocence? So going backwards number nine,

805
00:47:03,800 --> 00:47:06,400
this is very similar to when we ask jurors, or

806
00:47:06,480 --> 00:47:10,360
we tell jurors, do you understand that a defendant does

807
00:47:10,480 --> 00:47:13,800
not have to testify in this trial? Do you understand

808
00:47:13,880 --> 00:47:16,840
a defendant does not have the burden of presenting evidence

809
00:47:16,920 --> 00:47:20,039
on his or her own behalf and many times its

810
00:47:20,079 --> 00:47:22,000
side by a jurors will say well, I think they

811
00:47:22,000 --> 00:47:23,840
should tell this side of the story, and then the

812
00:47:23,920 --> 00:47:27,239
judges will say, well, if you are instructed by me

813
00:47:28,280 --> 00:47:31,199
that that is not to be considered, can you then

814
00:47:31,760 --> 00:47:34,800
abide by my instruction and be fair and impartion, and

815
00:47:35,000 --> 00:47:37,599
they always invariably say, well, yeah, I could, I guess,

816
00:47:38,119 --> 00:47:43,440
and then they will be accepted. I'm concerned about raising

817
00:47:43,920 --> 00:47:52,000
all of these so personal issues. There is a stigma

818
00:47:52,159 --> 00:47:56,639
in this country of mental disease or illness. There is,

819
00:47:57,000 --> 00:47:59,400
whether we acknowledge it or not, and it's embarrassing to

820
00:47:59,480 --> 00:48:05,199
many people. And I'm just concerned that jurors would, let's say,

821
00:48:05,239 --> 00:48:08,360
they answer yes to question two that you or a

822
00:48:08,480 --> 00:48:12,239
family member has been diagnosed with pp D or depression

823
00:48:12,440 --> 00:48:16,480
or generalized the anxiety disorder, and they say yes, and

824
00:48:16,599 --> 00:48:23,079
that's going to open up the inquiry into when, where, how, who,

825
00:48:23,679 --> 00:48:28,639
what medication, and will then invariably lead to kind of

826
00:48:28,679 --> 00:48:35,800
an inverse challenge by repeated challenges by the government. I

827
00:48:35,960 --> 00:48:40,360
think to pretty much any citizen what comes in here,

828
00:48:40,400 --> 00:48:43,440
it's almost like a reverse Patsing challenge. Any citizen that

829
00:48:43,559 --> 00:48:48,159
comes in here and has had mental treatment or has

830
00:48:48,360 --> 00:48:51,599
had what they perceive to be a mental disease and

831
00:48:51,679 --> 00:48:56,239
they have been on medication. They're going to say, hypothetically, yes,

832
00:48:56,360 --> 00:48:58,800
I have, and I saw doctor so and so, and

833
00:48:58,920 --> 00:49:02,199
I think that the are useless and I think they're terrible,

834
00:49:02,239 --> 00:49:04,800
and I think they're horrible, and they ruin my life,

835
00:49:05,159 --> 00:49:08,119
They're gone. They're going to challenge that person. If a

836
00:49:08,199 --> 00:49:11,840
person says, yes, I had medical treatment by a psychiatrist

837
00:49:11,920 --> 00:49:15,159
and I was on medication, that begs the question how

838
00:49:15,199 --> 00:49:17,360
did that work out for you? Was there any issue

839
00:49:17,440 --> 00:49:21,920
with the medication. Anyone that has any issue whatsoever with

840
00:49:22,079 --> 00:49:25,599
mental disease defect or medications is going to be tossed

841
00:49:26,079 --> 00:49:27,920
because of alleged.

842
00:49:29,159 --> 00:49:29,440
Speaker 1: Cause.

843
00:49:29,519 --> 00:49:31,320
Speaker 3: They're going to say it's for cause, because they have

844
00:49:31,440 --> 00:49:34,159
a preconceived notion, and that's going to wipe out a

845
00:49:34,199 --> 00:49:37,360
significant number of citizens that are being brought here to

846
00:49:37,480 --> 00:49:40,880
this court to sit on a jury. Recognizing the fact

847
00:49:42,239 --> 00:49:47,480
that the issue of mental disease defect treatment lack of

848
00:49:47,559 --> 00:49:52,920
criminal responsibility is central to this case, I certainly have

849
00:49:53,119 --> 00:49:56,400
no problem and I have confidence, as we always say,

850
00:49:56,920 --> 00:50:00,719
that the court will give a very forceful instruct to

851
00:50:00,880 --> 00:50:06,360
the jurors that, regardless of any preconceived notions, that they

852
00:50:06,440 --> 00:50:08,360
come into this court with a clean slate and they

853
00:50:08,400 --> 00:50:10,639
have to listen to the testimony, listen to the evidence.

854
00:50:10,679 --> 00:50:13,519
We do it all the time, usually to the detriment

855
00:50:13,599 --> 00:50:15,719
of the defense. But we do it, and we say, Okay,

856
00:50:15,800 --> 00:50:17,880
can you understand what I'm telling you that you don't

857
00:50:17,920 --> 00:50:20,639
have to listen to this, or that you don't have

858
00:50:20,800 --> 00:50:23,519
to feel the defendant has to present their evidence and

859
00:50:23,639 --> 00:50:25,800
we accept them as jurors. So I don't think it's

860
00:50:25,920 --> 00:50:32,199
fair to exclude a potentially significant number of people that

861
00:50:32,400 --> 00:50:36,559
would be good citizens, good jurors just because they have

862
00:50:36,760 --> 00:50:42,679
had mental disease or treatment psychiatrists, psychologists, MDMA or whatever

863
00:50:42,719 --> 00:50:45,079
they call it, or any of those treatments or medical

864
00:50:45,840 --> 00:50:49,960
issues with medications. I just think that it's we're flirting

865
00:50:50,039 --> 00:50:51,880
with disaster and that type of question.

866
00:50:53,599 --> 00:50:56,239
Speaker 1: So what would you want me to just ask? I

867
00:50:56,280 --> 00:50:58,559
have number three, number three.

868
00:50:58,639 --> 00:51:01,400
Speaker 3: Looking at number three, I think is is fine. The

869
00:51:01,480 --> 00:51:03,519
defense in this case is that ms Clancy is not

870
00:51:03,599 --> 00:51:05,880
guilty due to not being criminal or lack of criminal

871
00:51:05,960 --> 00:51:09,639
responsibility at the time she killed the three children. This

872
00:51:09,800 --> 00:51:12,199
is commonly referred to as an insanity defense. Is there

873
00:51:12,239 --> 00:51:15,400
anything about this so called insanity defense that would defend

874
00:51:15,440 --> 00:51:17,679
you a cause you to not be able to fairly

875
00:51:17,760 --> 00:51:20,239
decide this case? And then they come up on the

876
00:51:20,320 --> 00:51:24,960
individual widea and they say to you in our presence, yes,

877
00:51:25,800 --> 00:51:29,280
I don't like psychiatrists, or I don't like psychiatric medications,

878
00:51:29,400 --> 00:51:32,119
or my brother did something or other. Yeah, I think

879
00:51:32,239 --> 00:51:35,519
question three captures it instead of going through all of

880
00:51:35,599 --> 00:51:40,760
those questions number two, four, six, nine, I think number three.

881
00:51:40,920 --> 00:51:43,000
Speaker 1: I have no problem with calm.

882
00:51:44,360 --> 00:51:46,920
Speaker 5: Ernor. I think the questions should remain as they are.

883
00:51:47,800 --> 00:51:49,679
Defense Council's only objection to.

884
00:51:49,760 --> 00:51:53,360
Speaker 4: Them seems to be his belief in knowing how we're

885
00:51:53,440 --> 00:51:58,039
going to make decisions and how we're going to address

886
00:51:58,119 --> 00:52:01,519
issues or answers that come up at sidebar, and he

887
00:52:01,719 --> 00:52:04,239
is wrong about our approach, and he is wrong about

888
00:52:04,320 --> 00:52:05,599
the way we handle things.

889
00:52:06,519 --> 00:52:08,519
Speaker 5: I can speak for myself and I can say that

890
00:52:09,360 --> 00:52:11,320
if a person comes up and says that they have

891
00:52:11,480 --> 00:52:13,199
had mental.

892
00:52:12,960 --> 00:52:15,760
Speaker 4: Health treatment, mental health medication, I have no issue with that,

893
00:52:16,079 --> 00:52:17,760
as long as they can be fair and impartial to

894
00:52:17,800 --> 00:52:20,480
both sides, and I mean both sides, not just me,

895
00:52:20,760 --> 00:52:21,840
to the defense as well.

896
00:52:22,360 --> 00:52:23,960
Speaker 5: Now, his example that he gave.

897
00:52:23,880 --> 00:52:26,880
Speaker 4: That someone says I had an awful experience of the

898
00:52:26,920 --> 00:52:29,159
doctor ruined my life, and I can't be fair and impartial.

899
00:52:29,719 --> 00:52:31,920
I should think that neither side would want to take

900
00:52:31,960 --> 00:52:34,239
that person because we want a fair and impartial trial

901
00:52:34,639 --> 00:52:36,559
for both sides so I think.

902
00:52:36,519 --> 00:52:37,679
Speaker 5: The questions are fair.

903
00:52:38,079 --> 00:52:40,039
Speaker 4: I think the questions get to the heart of the

904
00:52:40,119 --> 00:52:42,639
issues that will be in this case, and I think

905
00:52:42,679 --> 00:52:45,239
a lot of them get to the issues that case

906
00:52:45,280 --> 00:52:47,880
law in this area addresses we should ask about. So

907
00:52:47,920 --> 00:52:50,519
i'd ask that you leave your questions as they are, all.

908
00:52:50,440 --> 00:52:51,679
Speaker 1: Right, I'm going to take a look at it. I

909
00:52:51,800 --> 00:52:54,679
may I don't think I'm going to go just with three,

910
00:52:55,639 --> 00:52:59,079
but I may combine. There are a couple of kind

911
00:52:59,159 --> 00:53:04,920
of kind of just going over the same kind of area.

912
00:53:05,639 --> 00:53:08,320
So I think if I can condense those, that's probably

913
00:53:08,400 --> 00:53:12,400
what I'll do, and I'll give parties the chance. We

914
00:53:12,480 --> 00:53:15,840
heard again in regards to that. So it'll probably be

915
00:53:15,960 --> 00:53:19,159
three and then maybe one other one addressing that kind

916
00:53:19,199 --> 00:53:22,320
of issue. Are anything else you want to.

917
00:53:22,360 --> 00:53:26,880
Speaker 3: Consider adding the question of do you understand that it

918
00:53:26,960 --> 00:53:29,599
depends that does not have an obligation to present any

919
00:53:29,599 --> 00:53:32,480
evidence or testifying questionnaire?

920
00:53:32,920 --> 00:53:35,679
Speaker 1: Bring them up, bring each or over the side, and

921
00:53:35,760 --> 00:53:38,679
then I'm going to ask, you know, some additional questions

922
00:53:39,599 --> 00:53:44,679
including defendant not having it testified and understanding not having

923
00:53:44,719 --> 00:53:48,760
to present any evidence. That's questions about police credibility, all

924
00:53:48,800 --> 00:53:52,039
those those type of things that I would generally ask

925
00:53:52,440 --> 00:53:56,000
I was just having the questionnaire because these are kind

926
00:53:56,000 --> 00:53:59,360
of issues to me, those type of questions in the questionnaire,

927
00:54:00,079 --> 00:54:02,559
it may be easier for people to go and kind

928
00:54:02,599 --> 00:54:05,119
of reflect a little bit instead of just standing up

929
00:54:05,159 --> 00:54:07,920
here for the first time being hit with these type

930
00:54:08,000 --> 00:54:12,400
questions partments. So I will ask you know, the fendant

931
00:54:12,599 --> 00:54:15,599
does not have to testify. The defendant has no obligation

932
00:54:15,719 --> 00:54:20,480
to present any evidence the police credibility question because kind

933
00:54:20,480 --> 00:54:22,880
of things along that those lines. I'll ask over here,

934
00:54:23,079 --> 00:54:24,880
and then the party is going to have a reasonable

935
00:54:24,920 --> 00:54:27,599
follow up as well. All right, thank you?

936
00:54:28,320 --> 00:54:32,679
Speaker 3: Anything else you gestured to that side of the bench

937
00:54:33,079 --> 00:54:33,880
with the individual?

938
00:54:34,599 --> 00:54:38,119
Speaker 1: The individual? What hear? That's just by force to happen, individuals,

939
00:54:40,559 --> 00:54:42,559
And that's part of why we're going to take that

940
00:54:42,639 --> 00:54:45,559
break to have the jury go back fill out the

941
00:54:45,639 --> 00:54:48,320
questionnaire and we'll set it up for the individual. Watch here,

942
00:54:48,360 --> 00:54:52,440
we'll do that over here, okay, all right, now, anything else?

943
00:54:53,800 --> 00:54:56,679
All right? Come on? All right, well, thank you very much.

944
00:54:57,199 --> 00:55:01,159
We'll see everybody on Monday one o'clock and we'll begin

945
00:55:01,239 --> 00:55:04,360
the impalement. You know, as you know, it'll probably take

946
00:55:04,360 --> 00:55:06,440
a little while before we get the jury up here.

947
00:55:06,519 --> 00:55:09,719
But if there's anything that we have to address before

948
00:55:10,559 --> 00:55:12,440
we go talk before we go talk to the jury,

949
00:55:12,639 --> 00:55:15,840
we could do with them, all right, all right, counsel,

950
00:55:15,880 --> 00:55:16,119
thank you,