1:45:39
What's this about a 'different iteration' of the letter? An early draft, that may no longer exist?
I take just at face value, that the written account of the phone call that was produced by Sybrina is not the only written account. I think it's fair to assume that any other iteration is a draft, but that's not the only possibility. For purposes of the motion for sanctions (for failure to timely produce), the letter (and any other iterations) is irrelevant. Bernardo took a long time getting to the point that the state learned of the letter at the same time defense did, ergo the state didn't have it to produce, ergo the state wasn't remiss in not producing it earlier - it can't produce what it doesn't have.
On a separate issue, I found it interesting that Nelson shut down the inquiry as to Martin being found with jewelry that wasn't his. O'Mara had completed his questioning of West as to what defense had found regarding Martin's past, and Bernardo was on a path to minimize the exculpatory nature of that finding by arguing that there was no allegation of crime, in particular, disagreement that the burglary tool was a weapon. Nelson (correctly) noted that any issue about hiding of Martin's past by the state was not the subject of the inquiry into sanctions. The motion for sanctions was narrowly drawn to failure to disclose that Witness 8 had not been hospitalized, as she had claimed.
I found it interesting because O'Mara raised many other similarly irrelevant (to W8 hospitalization claim) incidents of state stonewalling or delay, and Nelson let him ramble to his heart's content. I suspect Nelson is of a mind to exclude evidence of Martin's past from the trial, as "irrelevant and/or immaterial" to the charge and to the affirmative defense.
