Robert Durst Hearing over Defenses Demand for Mistrial Part 2 | Summary and Q&A

TL;DR

Proposal to allow remote testimony for witnesses over the age of 60 in a California trial; concerns raised about constitutional right to confrontation.

Key Insights

• 🧑‍⚕️ Remote testimony is being proposed as a solution to protect witnesses' health and safety during the COVID-19 pandemic.
• 🤨 The defense raises concerns about the potential impact on the defendant's right to confront and cross-examine witnesses.
• 🙃 The court will consider the evidence and arguments presented by both sides before making a decision on the remote testimony proposal.
• 🤕 The age limit of 60 for remote testimony is questioned in relation to CDC guidelines of 65 or older for COVID-19 risk.
• 💉 The court emphasizes the need to balance public health concerns with the constitutional right to confrontation in making a decision.

Transcript

i believe at some point mr lewis may have to sign off and i'll appear for him mr chestnut thank you all right we were uh discussing the issue of remote testimony and the proposal from mr lewin is to use 1340 of the peel code as a model 1340 ordinarily allows remote testimony in the context of conditional examinations but it is a model and the autho... Read More

Questions & Answers

Q: Does the proposed procedure satisfy Maryland vs. Craig's protection of the Sixth Amendment right to confront and cross-examine witnesses?

The prosecution argues that the chief justice of the California Supreme Court is aware of constitutional protections and has given guidance on using alternative means for remote testimony. They believe the proposed procedure aligns with these guidelines.

Q: Is there good cause to create a non-statutory procedure for remote testimony?

The prosecution argues that the COVID-19 pandemic presents a unique situation that justifies the need for remote testimony in order to protect the health and safety of witnesses and participants in the trial.

Q: Will the witnesses and their circumstances be specified?

The prosecution states that they will contact each out-of-state witness over the age of 60 to determine if they are willing to testify in person or if they have health concerns that require remote testimony. The specific circumstances of each witness will be taken into account.

Q: Can the defense provide evidence to support their objection to remote testimony?

The defense argues that remote testimony would not satisfy the constitutional right to confrontation. They cite Supreme Court Justice Scalia's opinion in Maryland vs. Craig, which emphasizes the historical importance of face-to-face confrontation in ensuring accurate testimony and fair trials.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• Mr. Lewin proposes using Section 1340 of the Peel Code as a model for remote testimony in the trial.

• Questions raised about the specific age of 60 for remote testimony, as opposed to the CDC guidelines of 65 or older.

• Concerns voiced about the constitutional right to confrontation and the potential impact on the defendant's ability to cross-examine witnesses.

• The court will consider the evidence and arguments presented by both sides before making a decision.