I'm not worried about this book as I don't see anything to impeach with as that would be what the prosecutor would look for.
Thanks for the explanation.
I take it that Robert Sr. didn't pull a Tracy Martin, and admit he didn't recognize his son's voice on the recording.
There's more than one way to skin, I mean impeach, a witness.Fla. Stat. § 90.612
(2) Cross-examination of a witness is limited to the subject matter of the direct examination and matters affecting the credibility of the witness. The court may, in its discretion, permit inquiry into additional matters.
Credibility includes bias (Fla. Stat. § 90.608(2)).
The prosecutors wouldn't have to ask about the book directly. They might ask questions like this:
Have you ever said that a prominent person was a racist?
Who was that person?
What made you think the person was racist?
Have you ever said that some organization was racist in character?
How many organizations have you described as racist in character?
Have you ever described as racist in character an organization that was not African-American?
The existence of the book would constrain Robert Sr.'s answers. If he denies saying what is in the book, it can be introduced as impeachment.
I would expect the defense to object to such questions on the grounds that their 'probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice' to the defendant (Fla. Stat. § 90.403).
This is obviously a judgment call, making it hard to predict how a judge will rule.
Parenthetically, Judge Nelson cited 90.403 today, in the Order Excluding the Opinion Testimony of Dr. Reich and Mr. Owen