"The appeals court gave the state 20 days to argue why it shouldn't consider to hear the appeal"

FAIL. The DCA gave the state 20 days to show cause why the petition should not be granted.

http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0413/5dca_order.pdf

Not sure if Blackwell will be invited to the party!

What remedy could they argue would be available on appeal?

If he can't be deposed, he'll not testify, so there is nothing to appeal regarding how that testimony would have changed the trial result ...unless they accept an appeal based on the perception of the defense what that his testimony would have revealed, determining, hypothetically, that it would alter the result.

Prediction: Crump will move to intervene as respondent.



The argument will be that GZ can appeal denial of the motion to depose Crump after trial, in event of conviction. In that circumstance, in the event that the order denying discovery is found erroneous, the state has the burden of proving "harmless error" beyond a reasonable doubt: that denial of discovery did not effect the result. Since the content of the prospective discovery is unknown, the state will have difficulty meeting that burden, or so the argument goes.

In the instant case, however, there are special circumstances that motivate for pretrial relief to get it right the first time, and not have to try the case again. What special circumstances? The whole scheme team saga: intense BS campaign orchestrated by Crump to generate media and political frenzy, death threats, NBP wanted dead or alive bounty, defendant in hiding, defendant family in hiding, tweets of family address w/ death threats, tweets about locating defendant w/ death threats, security costs for defendant and family, difficulty in seating a fair jury (500 potential jurors), threats of riots, gavel to gavel coverage that will further prejudice jury pool in event GZ is found guilty after erroneous denial of discovery, enhanced security costs for trial.

This is not an ordinary case. I don't think mere formalistic application of the usual case law will suffice. This case is similar to the Lozano case in which the DCA granted pretrial relief in connection with an errant trial court venue order.

http://www.royblack.com/blog/lozano/

RZ,Jr. has Gutman on the run. Gutman's defense: I told the truth now and then.

https://twitter.com/rzimmermanjr/status/321753895254757377





Edit Rumpole
If you retain and highlight JUST the tweet number
You can embed using [tweet] button

So, after trial, the Defense could argue they hoped Crump would have given evidence in his testimony they could use to contradict witnesses with on cross-examination or later to impeach them, basically using the same information presently in their Petition.

Then the State would be required to prove any potential testimony Crump would have given is harmless?

Yeah, that's basically it.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case? ... s_sdt=2,45

I did not know Gutman was still so active on the case. That does not strike me as wise.

Thanks for posting that, I had not seen it.

Reminder


As well as this DAILY discussion thread about the GZ case... there is also

DAILY DAFT POSTS FROM JUSTARSE QUEST
viewtopic.php?f=45&t=822&p=30847#p30847



If only Trayvon had kept his hands in his pockets, none of this would have happened.

][/quote]

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

There is a docket sounding scheduled for April 30th, 2013.
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Rel ... 202013.pdf

Thanks Deb.

Nice to see the official paperwork.

That hearing was scheduled way back when Frau Nelson set out her Master Plan.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

That hearing may well be very interesting... since the petition to 5DCA will sill be in progress.

It will be 2 days after State Response to 5DCA, and 8 days before Defense reply

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

So when are witness lists due? April 17 ?

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Rel ... losure.pdf

I dunno? Was there an extension? They were due March 27?

I missed that.

I will add to calendar... thanks.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

New Improved updated Calendar......................

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

I think that it was, BDLR mentioned it in one of the responses that he had agreed to an extension.

But the defense already released theirs. Why can't the state figure it out?

JG,
I am looking for verification of something? Let's assume that the Petition is granted. Can Crump still fight and refuse to comply? Can Blackwell appeal the decision on his behalf, not sure on the grounds, to keep his client from testifying? I know that him going to the deposition and claiming privilege or pleading the 5th might be easier but, I was curious as to what would happen if Crump wanted to keep refusing.

I don't remember any expert witnesses listed for the Defense in that list of possibles. I will have to go look again.