A few Scruggsiana tails thumping
Once again, Scruggsiana is pretty quiet this cold morning, only Y’allPolitics idly thumping its tail a lick or two while keeping its head on its paws near the pot-bellied stove.
That is to say, Alan Lange links to LNL’s 12/31 story, “Scruggs’ attorneys want all evidence,” and its list of the 14 defense requests for more&better discovery. Then commenter lawdoctor1960 provides some tail-thumps:
Scruggs is sixty one years old … He has nothing to lose by going to trial. Keker and Scruggs’ main problem is to not let the younger guys think too much about the reasons his strategy may not be a good one for them.
Some of that motion is boilerplate, some of it is for stuff the judge isn’t likely to give them, and I imagine, some of it is for stuff they already have and don’t realize it yet.
It’s hard enough understanding the relationship of a lot of recordings, reports, and witness statements in a criminal case when you were there as it was collected. It’s much worse when it is dumped on you in a pile to make sense of as best you can (and without the agents who will be explaining the [relevance] of the evidence and its relationships to the defendant’s guilt, over and over again, to the prosecutors, until they get it).
And, another problem for the defendants [is] whether or not to ask for more continuances. Continuances not only give the defense more time to get ready, they also give the prosecution more time to get ready.
This comment suggesting lawyering experience on both sides of the criminal-trial “v” I find worth noting. That the joint defense team has locals involved may help Keker a little — but except for Joey Langston, none of these lawyers seems to have been close to the defendants as the alleged events happened. Actually, scratch that: according to our friend Orchid, we should add Hiram Eastland and possibly Ronald Michael to the close-in list too.
FOLO
1/1/8
Magnolia Tribune
