Following Brady, the prosecutor must disclose evidence or information that would prove the innocence of the defendant or would enable the defense to more effectively impeach the credibility of government witnesses. Evidence that would serve to reduce the defendant's sentence must also be disclosed by the prosecution. The prosecutor must disclose an agreement not to prosecute a witness in exchange for the witness's testimony. The prosecutor must disclose leniency (or preferential treatment) agreements made with witnesses in exchange for testimony. The prosecutor must disclose exculpatory evidence known only to the police. That is, the prosecutor has a duty to reach out to the police and establish regular procedures by which the police must inform him of anything that tends to prove the innocence of the defendant. However, the prosecutor is not obligated to personally review police files in search of exculpatory information when the defendant asks for it. The prosecutor must disclose arrest photographs of the defendant when those photos do not match the victim's description. Some state systems have expansively defined Brady material to include many other items, including for example any documents which might reflect negatively on a witness's credibility. Police officers who have been dishonest are sometimes referred to as "Brady cops." Because of the Brady ruling, prosecutors are required to notify defendants and their attorneys whenever a law enforcement official involved in their case has a sustained record for knowingly lying in an official capacity. In order to ensure compliance with Brady, the United States Supreme Court repeatedly urged the "careful prosecutor" to favor disclosure over concealment. Conformity with Brady is a continuing obligation of prosecutors.
Remember now their was no evidence at either crime scene that even hinted Windsor was the suspect. The one and only thing tclaimed hat wrongly convicted Windsor was a woman Sammy Sue Osborn
that at first statement to police did not identify Windsor, after the reward was offered she then made an in court ID. She lived five miles from the Howard scene and said a man named Harvey was at her
place that day? Excuse me if Windsor was at her place why could she not identify him?
Also note the car that witnesses described at the scenes? was a small green car, likely a Toyota, Datsun. Throughout this trial the car that witnesses described was with held from the trial.
- WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE? READ HERE
- FACE TO FACE WITH SUSPECT AND DID NOT IDENTIFY WINDSOR READ HERE
- LOOKING FOR WRONG MAN AND WRONG CAR READ HERE
- INCONSTINTCIES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS TWO READ HERE
- INCONSTENCIES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS ONE READ HERE
- WITNESS STATEMENTS THREE READ HERE
- WITNESS TWO READ STATEMENTS READ HERE
- WITNESS STATEMENTS ONE READ HERE
- SABOTAGE FROM THE WINDSOR DEFENSE TEAM? READ HERE <
- Owner operator's of Tommy's Shell Station Here
No comments:
Post a Comment