www.jaygaskill.com/blog1 -> www.jaygaskill.com/blog1/
com All contents, unless otherwise indicated are Copyright 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 by Jay B Gaskill Permission to publish, distribute or print all or part of this article (except for personal use) is needed.
com HANS REISER ON TRIAL THE DA HAS RESTED WITHOUT INTRODUCING FURTHER FORENSIC EVIDENCE. Since yesterday's post, Bill DuBois' cross examination of Nina's Russian mother has done little to undercut the impact of the son's testimony about Daddy carrying a Mommy sized package down stairs - it was ambiguous and dreamy before and remains so now, along with his confused and confusing account of mommy leaving the house - or not.
Grandma: "We would just keep the conversation going when would start a conversation like that. We never were the ones to start the conversation," she Dubois: "And did you tell during these conversations that he statedthat Hans hid his mother?" Dubois: "And did you tell him that Hans did something bad to Nina?"
The bottom line is that Grandma denied influencing the boy and the jury will have to sort this out. The picture in question (of Dad carrying something) was produced when the boy was with Russian social workers. On another tack, DuBois explored Nina's relationships with two prior boyfriends, the strange Sean Sturgeon (whom the jury has not seen) and Anthony Zografos, who has testified. The obvious purpose of this line of questioningwas to create the impression that perhaps a jilted, jealous lover might have a motive to harm Nina. If so, the effort turned up nothing out of the ordinary. This leaves the case about where I described it yesterday, with all eyes onthe defense: that phase starts with evidence on Tuesday morning. Pending that effort, I am now separately posting the first of two or more guides to the final arguments.
efore you may rely on circumstantial evidence to find the defendant guilty, you must be convinced that the only reasonable conclusion supported bythe circumstantial evidence is that the defendant is guilty. If you can draw two or more reasonable conclusions from the circumstantial evidence and one of those reasonable conclusions points to innocence and another to guilt, you must accept the one that points to innocence. However, when considering circumstantial evidence, you must accept only reasonable conclusions and reject any that are unreasonable." The defense will try to break down and compartmentalize each bit of damaging evidence, applying the circumstantial rule to negate each separate, potentially incriminating fact. For example, we can expect the defense to argue that a particular DNA sample might reasonably have gotten there innocently - think of that hard-to-seesmear of Nina's blood that was recovered and identified from the stuff sack. The argument might then go like this: "As the trial judge will instruct - whenever one of those reasonable conclusions points to innocence and another to guilt, you must accept the one that points to innocence'. Nina could easily have left a blood trace at a different, happier time in the relationship. Under the rules, if you find that to be a reasonable possibility, then you, the jury, must adopt the innocent conclusion and move on." This technique can be repeated for other blood stains, the car washing and so on. This repeated use of the rule, in effect the balkanization of the DA's case, is one of those fallacious forms of argument that the defense is allowed to pursue without an interruption by the judge. A prosecutor in a case like this will typically argue that the jury is entitled to aggregate all of the proved suspicious and incriminating circumstances as a whole. Then, using common sense, the jury will determine whether the total weight of all circumstances can reasonably be reconciled with the conclusion that the defendant is innocent. A prosecutor may point to the defendant in the courtroom meaningfully -- "You don't have to leave your common sense behind when you enter the jury room." How effectively Paul Hora calls Bill DuBois on the "divide and ignore" defense technique will matter because ultimately any trial is about credibility. That is especially one in one like the Reiser case where each lawyer willbe telling the jury with a straight face that the evidence points in opposite directions!
com All contents, unless otherwise indicated are Copyright 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 by Jay B Gaskill Permission to publish, distribute or print all or part of this article (except for personal use) is needed.
The prosecution reportedly intends to rest with the testimony of Nina's Russian mother. I doubt that thebalance of her testimony today and any cross examination - possibly running over till tomorrow - will alter the legal landscape much. So far, little of forensic interest has been added, although there was great emotional interest, even elements of soap opera - references to Nina's old boyfriend, the wedding to Hans and so on. Among the main points of interest: Grandma wanted to raise the children because she didn't want them to be with "a killer." She confirmed the animus Hans had towards Nina, and that her daughter wanted to raise the children in the US. At one point, the jury heard Nina mother's translation of her last call to Nina on the day her daughter vanished -"My dear, dear, dear little Nina. The DA drew a little blood with this quote (hearsay received over objection), from Hans' son via Grandma on the stand: "Momma has disappeared. Poppa is with the police because he doesn't want to answer questions that have to do with her disappearance." Then: Grandma sent DA Hora an email from Russia of a picture little R drew depicting his vision/dream/recollection (never clear which) about Dad carrying a Mom sized bag down stairs.
Then an even more sinister colloquy with the boy was recounted. He said that Mommy and Dad frequently fought, but he confirmed that he saw Mom leave the house for the last time. The boy talked about a room in the house wherehe thought Daddy might have hidden Mommy, described as having an exterior door. And he reportedly described a fight in which (in Grandma's words) Nina "couldn't scream because Hans covered her mouth with a scarf." This was all impossibly vague as to time, place and circumstance and the defense is sure to seize on the concession from the boy to his grandmother that he say his mother leave the house (presumably on the final day). While this will fall short of an alibi, it contains the seeds of doubt, just as the scarf description contains the seeds of terror.
If the DA rests after Nina's mother, Irina Sharanova, finishes, then an important opportunity to tie up loose forensic ends will have been missed. As I write this on Wednesday afternoon during Ms Shasanova's testimony, there is no "smoking gun" - just a deep, sinister cloud surrounding this defendant. Most jurors - maybe all twelve - are leaning for conviction. What, they will soon ask themselves, does "reasonable doubt" mean, anyway? The defense task is to take nagging doubts and incomplete proof, and turn the mix into a vote for "not proved". The system doesn't require a vote forinnocence, a good thing for Reiser. That would be forensically out of the question - absent a real alibi. I suspect that Bill DuBois is thinking that, unless he screws up at this juncture, he probably has a hung jury in the bag. This why he has recently temporized about whether his client will testify. You can bet that the defense team has worked Hans over - urging Hans not to take the stand. And youcan bet that Hans is resisting, hoping he can work some kind of magic on the jury. Surely, he thinks, these people will see the conspiracy against him as clearly as he did. HERE IS MY SCORE CARD ISSUE 1 Hans hated Nina and wanted her out of the way: Proved. The only reasonable explanation is that Hans murdered Nina. The rules forbid the DA from commenting on a defendant's decision to stay off the witness stand, or from asking the jury to draw a negative inference from that decision. But the jury can be asked to draw an inference of consciousness of guilt from a cover up and from the destruction of evidence. If Hans takes the stand, expect these questions, among ot...
|
http://csua.com/feed/