Since the state failed to file any specific objections, do you think the judge will give them a second bite at the apple to do so? If not, do you think this means the judge will grant the motion to supress these items without further objections from the state? The judge, notably, stated that he will not allow oral arguments to be made in court if those specific arguments were not laid out in written responses or filings.
She wants to suppress the ATT warrant and if that is suppressed the motions for the remaining will be suppressed. So, what does that mean? The prosecution has no case. The case cannot move forward. This is why.
just wanted to add. don’t be surprised to see a possible defense Reply to the State response and then a ruling by the Court. thank you all for your input.
Yes, I need some of that energy. I have a question. What benefit does it have for Bryan Kohberger’s case to suppress all that information IF they never found any evidence?
One important reason is to hold agencies and those accountable for violating his and ours rights whether there is seemingly “no evidence,” inculpatory evidence, or exculpatory evidence. This is also in filings. That is important. LE/FBI do not get to sit on a pedestal without being questioned. Nor do judges, prosecutors or any other agency. The idea that the Defense wants to suppress evidence because there must be so much evidence against Bryan is a one sided assessment fallacy. Which most people who lean “guilty” tend to use this reasoning, and it is flawed. As you can see there is more than one reason for suppression as in challenging the legal means of how, why, and when evidence or warrants, ect were obtained. Rights matter. Suppression if granted and depending on the reasoning, can also be used to impeach a witness from the Prosecution side (an expert, a police officer, a forensic pathologist..ect) and it can also help identify even more exculpatory evidence that would benefit the Defense.
@ Thank you. Great answer! Especially as I don’t tend to automatically lean towards a person’s guilt until I heard the evidence. I have watched a lot of trials lately, and thought the jury would find them Not Guilty due to the lack of evidence (in my opinion). It appears that perhaps getting a warrant and searching all his private and personal places and data could be enough to suggest guilt to some. Appreciate your passionate and thoughtful reply.
@@lillyshaw9439 Hey there:) Thank you! I didn’t mean to imply that you thought that way, sorry if it came off like that. I should have said I was speaking in general.😊
Love these snackable updates 🙏❤️
Girl your on fire today.
Since the state failed to file any specific objections, do you think the judge will give them a second bite at the apple to do so? If not, do you think this means the judge will grant the motion to supress these items without further objections from the state?
The judge, notably, stated that he will not allow oral arguments to be made in court if those specific arguments were not laid out in written responses or filings.
Why would she want to suppress the car . If nothing was found in the car you would want us to know that 😮
I think just because everything that was done illegally is included,even if there is no evidence IMO
@@mimi-422 Correct. Anne has to be consistent. If the apartment search was illegal, that makes the car search illegal. That's all.
She wants to suppress the ATT warrant and if that is suppressed the motions for the remaining will be suppressed. So, what does that mean? The prosecution has no case. The case cannot move forward. This is why.
@@HildeAzul Congratulations, you are exactly right!
@@falconquest2068 Which also makes arrest illeagl,lol
So was the motion to suppress search warrant for Pennsylvania granted?
We don’t know yet.
The judge hasn’t ruled on it yet.
just wanted to add. don’t be surprised to see a possible defense Reply to the State response and then a ruling by the Court. thank you all for your input.
@ … and as Pav stated, the defense check mated the prosecution!
Yes, I need some of that energy.
I have a question.
What benefit does it have for Bryan Kohberger’s case to suppress all that information IF they never found any evidence?
One important reason is to hold agencies and those accountable for violating his and ours rights whether there is seemingly “no evidence,” inculpatory evidence, or exculpatory evidence. This is also in filings. That is important. LE/FBI do not get to sit on a pedestal without being questioned. Nor do judges, prosecutors or any other agency.
The idea that the Defense wants to suppress evidence because there must be so much evidence against Bryan is a one sided assessment fallacy. Which most people who lean “guilty” tend to use this reasoning, and it is flawed. As you can see there is more than one reason for suppression as in challenging the legal means of how, why, and when evidence or warrants, ect were obtained. Rights matter.
Suppression if granted and depending on the reasoning, can also be used to impeach a witness from the Prosecution side (an expert, a police officer, a forensic pathologist..ect) and it can also help identify even more exculpatory evidence that would benefit the Defense.
@ Thank you. Great answer!
Especially as I don’t tend to automatically lean towards a person’s guilt until I heard the evidence.
I have watched a lot of trials lately, and thought the jury would find them Not Guilty due to the lack of evidence (in my opinion).
It appears that perhaps getting a warrant and searching all his private and personal places and data could be enough to suggest guilt to some.
Appreciate your passionate and thoughtful reply.
@@lillyshaw9439 Hey there:) Thank you! I didn’t mean to imply that you thought that way, sorry if it came off like that. I should have said I was speaking in general.😊
@ I knew that. It just felt like passion. Admire that.
@@Jenn7SPerfectly Said!🎯👍💯💯💯💯