Mr. Jackson’s Opposition to District Attorney’s Request that Court Modify it’s Teal Motion Excerpts: “Teal” recognized that defense lawyers have a right to develop and investigate their cases without telegraphing their intentions to the prosecution. The holding of “Teal” would be meaningless if the District Attorney is provided with information regarding each subpoena and is allowed to be heard on each subpoena. There are two parties to this lawsuit. The other party has used more than 80 search warrants to promote their interpretation of the facts of the case. Mr. Jackson is entitled to investigate the case and prepare a defense. Counsel for Mr. Jackson should be allowed to continue issuing subpoena’s without providing the prosecution with information regarding those subpoenas in order to protect Mr. Jackson’s right to investigate and develop his defense. ———————————————————— The District Attorney claims that he is not attempting to act as an attorney for the complaining witnesses and that he is merely bringing facts to the Court’s attention. (Motion, page 8) This claim is belied by fact that the District Attorney repeatedly asserts the rights of the witnesses as a basis for his motion. (Motion, pages 17-20) Under the guise of “protecting” the interests of the complaining witnesses the District Attorney is attempting to shield the witnesses from cross-examination by counsel for Mr. Jackson and appropriate scrutiny by the Court and the trier of fact. The District Attorney has no legitimate interest in hiding deception, bias and a motive to mislead the Court or the jury on the part of critical witnesses. :nav Defense’s Reply to DA’s Request to Modify Teal Motion 11-24-04

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *