Jean: Do you have an opinion on this?
Goodenow: All DNA evidence needs to be turned over to the defense. Exculpatory and inculpatory evidence both should be provided when received. All should be turned over. “The statute does not say written report, it says report.”
Statute says all 46 members of the lacrosse team should have been provided this information because they were tested, says Goodenow.
Jean: Is it proper for a prosecutor to ask for incomplete results? Goodenow: That would not be proper, to tell them to not include some findings.
Goodenow says she would never tell a lab how to write a report, that this violates standards of practice for DAs.
She says she has never heard of a prosecutor leaving out unmatching DNA information, nor has she ever heard of a lab report not including it, nor has she heard of a DA calling a lab to dictate to them what not to put into a report.
Alright, not only is Nifong toast, but Meehan too is browning up nicely.
She says that 1,800 pages of underlying data does not constitute a “report.” She says usually you get a summary, “a roadmap,” so lawyers can understand what was discovered.
NC Statute 15A-903 requires DAs to provide to the defense anything in their files, she says.
Jean: Would just turning over underlying data and not an analysis comply with statutes? Goodenow: it would not be in compliance with one certain discovery statute.
OK, I’m beginning to wonder if Nifong did anything ethical and in compliance with standards from the day he learned about this case to the day he recused himself.
She says exculpatory evidence should be given to the defense the moment the DA becomes aware of it, she says, because it goes directly to guilt or innocence.
Says a prosecutor who provides a written report that leaves out important evidence is automatically out of compliance with state statutes.
