Mr. Jackson’s Motion in Limine to Limit Uncharged Conspirator Hearsay (pg 2) (1) An order prohibiting the attorneys for plaintiff from offering [any] evidence of and prohibiting plaintiff’s attorneys and witnesses from making any reference in the presence of jurors or prospective jurors of any uncharged conspirator hearsay statements, unless and until plaintiff establishes by independent evidence the existence of the alleged conspiracy to the trier of fact, the jury, by non-hearsay evidence as a preliminary fact under Evidence Code section 402; (pg 2) (2) Use of uncharged conspirator hearsay should not be permitted to establish the existence of the alleged conspiracy, and plaintiff may only utilize independent non-hearsay evidence sufficient to establish the existence of the alleged conspiracy as a preliminary fact shown by a preponderance of the evidence before such hearsay may be brought before the trier of fact; (pg 3-4) The Indictment was markedly different from the December 18 2003, Complaint. The Complaint contained seven (7) counts of Lewd Acts Upon a Child, where the Indictment contained only four (4), plus one of Attempted Lewd Act Upon a Child. Somewhere, the perception of the facts in this case was significantly altered, and the Indictment no longer followed the details and chronology recounted by _________. In addition, the Complain alleged two (2) counts of Administration of an Intoxicant, where the Indictment alleged four (4). In view of repeated interviews and witness statements, the change in facts, counts, and dates has created an irrconcilable inconsistency with no explanation. The dates of the alleged crimes also changed. The Complaint said five (5) of the seven (7) “lewd acts” allegedly occurred “on or between February 7 2003, and March 10 2003,” and all the other counts occurred between February 20 and March 10 2003. But the Indictment now says that all but the new conspiracy charges occurred between February 20, and March 12 2003. Now it is a conspiracy starting February 7, but no lewd act until February 20. This was not just a narrowing of the time period, but it was also a lengthening of the time period. Suddenly, something happened on March 12 that was not included in the Complaint. (pg 4) The five (5) uncharged co-conspirators are alleged to have engaged in the primary acts of child abduction, extortion, and false imprisonment. The allegations are so bizarre that when it comes time for plaintiff to make these assertions to the jury, they will be presented through a long recital of hearsay statement from the complaining witnesses. The inherent untrustworthiness of hearsay should alarm this court as to the nature of these claims and the mental condition, including _____________________ of the person making the claims. (pg 8) In this case, Mr. Jackson will not second guess the bizarre nature of the testimony plaintiff wishes to offer to support its far fetched conspiracy theories. Rather, the important point for this court to recognize is that the conspiracy must be established as a preliminary fact independent of any uncharged conspirator hearsay before the jury is permitted to hear such hearsay. In addition, the existence of the conspiracy needs to be established by a preponderance of the evidence to the jury before any uncharged conspirator hearsay may come before the jury. :nav Mr. Jackson’s Motion in Limine to Limit Uncharged Conspirator Hearsay

Leave a Reply

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