
Murder In Moscow: The Alternative Perpetrator Motion And Inconclusive Data Motion In Limine (3/14/25)-
14/3/2025
0:00
10:13
In Case No. CR01-24-31665, the defense filed Motion in Limine #5 titled "Re: Inconclusive Data," seeking to exclude certain evidence deemed inconclusive. The court granted the defense's request to seal this motion, as indicated in an order dated March 3, 2025. Consequently, the specific details and arguments presented in the motion are not publicly accessible.
In Case No. CR01-24-31665, the State filed a Motion in Limine on February 21, 2025, to restrict the defense from introducing or arguing alternative perpetrator evidence without first meeting specific relevance and admissibility standards as outlined in the Idaho Rules of Evidence (I.R.E.) 401, 402, and 403. The State contends that during the investigation, thousands of tips regarding possible perpetrators were received, but none, except those related to the defendant, were substantiated. Allowing the defense to present alternative perpetrator theories without concrete evidence directly connecting others to the homicides could mislead and confuse the jury, result in undue delays, waste time, and unfairly prejudice the State's case.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
022425-Motion-inLimine5-RE-Inconclusive-Data.pdf
022125-States-Motion-in-Limine-RE-Alternative-Perpetrator-Evidence.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
In Case No. CR01-24-31665, the State filed a Motion in Limine on February 21, 2025, to restrict the defense from introducing or arguing alternative perpetrator evidence without first meeting specific relevance and admissibility standards as outlined in the Idaho Rules of Evidence (I.R.E.) 401, 402, and 403. The State contends that during the investigation, thousands of tips regarding possible perpetrators were received, but none, except those related to the defendant, were substantiated. Allowing the defense to present alternative perpetrator theories without concrete evidence directly connecting others to the homicides could mislead and confuse the jury, result in undue delays, waste time, and unfairly prejudice the State's case.
to contact me:
[email protected]
source:
022425-Motion-inLimine5-RE-Inconclusive-Data.pdf
022125-States-Motion-in-Limine-RE-Alternative-Perpetrator-Evidence.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
Otros episodios de "The Epstein Chronicles"
No te pierdas ningún episodio de “The Epstein Chronicles”. Síguelo en la aplicación gratuita de GetPodcast.