Says he wants to talk about the media and the issues related to that, and then get to the DNA stuff. “I think it starts falling apart.”
Seems to be saying the defense had a lot to do with the media frenzy by responding to Nifong’s comments. Says “we are dealing with first impressions.”
Witt: Negligent, knowing and intentional are the standards of discipline. Williamson: That’s a Phase 2 argument, isn’t it? Witt: Agrees the DNA handling was negligent, and may get up to knowing, but was never intentional. Says Nifong was inexperienced with dealing with the media. [This is the “I was dumb and incompetent” defense.] Says he had no ulterior motive such as his campaign.
Williamson: “There’s not a neophyte defense for this.” “How do we avoid an inference that there is a direct connection to the statements he made and the political campaign in which he was engaged.”
Witt: If there was a connection, why didn’t he dismiss the charges after he won the election?
Williamson: I see that is an explanation but I don’t think it’s logical. “It defies belief that there was not a connection.” Points out that many of these statements were made a political functions.
This is not going well for Witt.
[What’s a Stanly County “Whoa”?]
Williamson: “It’s also consistent with someone feigning ignorance.” To say “Whoa” after being shown the lack of the full report on Dec. 15. Says both parties placing more importance on the agreement with Nifong than there should be. “We’re not here to try Dr. Meehan…we’re here solely to try Mr. Nifong.” Says the prosecution really doesn’t have to show a conspiracy with Meehan. All they need to show is that Nifong knew about this not being presented to the defense in the report.
Witt: “Dr. Meehan talks a lot.” Williamson: “Yeah!” [laughter in the room]
Williamson: “This is really bothering me…at the Sept. 22 hearing Mr. Nifong’s attention is specifically drawn to that report and they’re saying there’s something specifically missing there” and then in December he says “whoa” that’s news to me and he never even went’ back and read it. “How do you explain that.”
Witt: “He’s a truthful guy. I have no way to explain it.” Witt is now rambling like Nifong did yesterday.
Williamson: “Why is this not damning?” Witt: Rambling again. Looking at Freeman’s body language sitting listening to Witt, you can tell he knows this is over.
Williamson: I understand your argument. [At least he does.] Not sure he buys it, though. “You can’t argue that it (the information) was never turned over.” “How could he not know if he had read it?”
Witt: If he didn’t read it he wouldn’t know. Maybe he just didn’t give it the care and attention he should.
Williamson: Even if that’s true, how does that put him in any better position? He was repeatedly told to go look at it and he didn’t. How does that put him in any better position?
Witt: Cites perhaps “bullheadedness” for Nifong not going back to read the reports. Says when arrows are being shot at you then you can leave a hearing and just want to forget all about it. [Huh?] If it were intentional why would he put Meehan on the stand.
Williamson: He called Meehan and said it was his problem because it wasn’t in your report and “I’m going to hang you out to dry and that’s what he did.” “You’re looking at it as an advocate. We’re the decider guys.”
Witt: The in-chambers meeting and the fact that he never asked Meehan any questions at the Dec. 15 hearing shows he didn’t intentionally keep this report excluded. [???] Reads several instances where Meehan says Nifong never asked him to exclude anything.
Williamson: But when he said “matching” didn’t that right there limit the data in the report? Witt: You could interpret it that way but that’s not accurate. Says he clearly should have included everything but when dealing with new science on DNA it’s reasonable to conclude that he just missed it.
Williamson: They were looking “for positive matches to the lacrosse players.” Looks like he had blinders on to evidence that might show there was no connection to the lacrosse players.
Witt: They went and got DNA swabs from the boyfriend and two others. “So they were following up on other individuals” in the investigation.
[Just wondering: Are all the hours the boys’ lawyers are sitting in this hearing billable?]
Williamson: Makes a joke about Judge Brannon’s statement that “every time I had open discovery I had to go to trial.” [Laughter]
Williamson: “What good is an open file policy if the information doesn’t get into the file, which is what happened here?”
Witt: He’s an old-school guy. This was an unusual circumstance, with an independent lab.
Williamson: Prosecutors need to have the ability to know what’s exculpatory and give it up.
Witt: Old rules, new rules. Nifong got confused. There used to be no prohibition on lawyers having sex with clients. There is now.
Williamson: “We’ve already got enough sex in this case.”
Witt: Prosecutors’ case doesn’t rise to the intentional level. Meehan said on the stand here that he didn’t have an agreement with Nifong. Agrees it was a false statement, but questions it was a knowing false statement and categorically denies it was intentional. The fact that he said it over and over doesn’t make it intentional if it’s the same mistake each time.
