IANAL
The comments by W8/RJ’s lawyer are interesting, though he works hard to avoid being tied down to specifics. I have wondered why a “pro bono” lawyer/spokesman did not appear early in this case to represent W8/RJ. The face recognition on television alone should have been worth something to an aspiring lawyer in the greater Miami market.
I see it as a major systemic failure in this case that the testimony of W8/RJ was not locked down before the Affidavit of Probably Cause was signed. The snippets by Mr. Crump and BDLR did not come close to being adequate in my opinion. Such testimony would have a required a prolonged interview, most likely on video, to fully document her recollections. That would include a minute by minute discussion based on the cell phone records, as well as a lot of background information. As it was, her recollections would likely become more uncertain and intermingled in the time between the events and the court time.
Probably even more concerning is that prosecution made that choice early on, so they likely appreciated the weakness of her testimony, to the point of hiding her name and background even to the defense. Then the case dragged on for 16 months. At the trial, the critical witness who “connected the dots” was evidently found not credible by the jury.
Justice long deferred may be justice denied, but GZ and his family paid a heavy price for someone who was found not guilty of anything by a jury of his peers. The potential for tyranny from an abusive judicial system was quite apparent, as Mr. O’Mara opined.
Again, IANAL.
