ninethIt was June, 11th. The prosecution called it’s first witness, the deputy sheriff that first responded when the mother called to report the rape. The questioning was fairly short. He went through when he responded, what was said and some other details of the case was presented. One detail is that there was no rape kit used. No DNA samples, no forensics. This was due to the fact that the survivor had waited several days to report the rape and thus all the forensic evidence would have been lost.

The defense then did his cross examination and tried to prove sloppy police work citing the lack of forensics. There was the occasional objection by each side during the questioning by each side. Some were sustained, some were overruled.

The second witness was then called. This would be the detective that interviewed the defendant and also had the survivor call the defendant with him listening in to see if they could get the defendant to admit to what he had done.

It seems that in the Florida courts, the lawyers seem to have a problem with technology. It was no different in this trial. The first problem came about when the attorney wanted to play the interview of the defendant by the detective. In front of the jury is a long barrier that is about 6 inches wide along the top. This allowed the prosecuting attorney to put the dell lap top he was using on it with a set of external speakers plugged into it. Somewhere on the bottom of the barrier, the attorney plugged the power supply for the speaker into it and then cued the machine up to play the file, or at least he tried. The second he turned to ask the detective a question about what we were about to hear, one of the speakers vanished and wound up crashing to the floor. The attorney had kicked the power supply sending it and the speaker flying outward.

It soon became clear that the attorney had broken the speaker. It was then decided to try and play the interview at the attorney’s podium using the microphone there to pick up the sound from the lap top’s speakers.

This would have been a great idea if they could get the thing to work. The lap top refused to play the file. It kept locking up. It was then that there was a side bar and they came up with a rather interesting way to present the interview.

Since they could not get the computer to work the attorney and the detective decided to put on a little play. The detective played himself and the attorney played the defendant. They did a decent job. It was the strangest thing I had ever seen in court.

Once that side show was over and the defense did their cross, we broke for lunch.

After lunch, the next witness would be called.

To be continued

Stay tuned