- Joined
- Jul 13, 2017
I have a feeling both Null and Sean are right, and Hardin will write a very good motion.Why wouldn't a MNDES upload of the exhibit, memorandum footnotes citing it in support of your motion's argument, and a transcript's initial discussion of it as one of your exhibits collectively count as presenting it, even if he subsequently wanted to "get rid of it" or it subsequently was not admitted? Without any statutory definitions section or any appellate direction on the definition of "presented" in this unique context, Hardin should be free to go straight to the Webster's definition and contend that the MNDES upload and the memorandum filing were the point of no return.
I especially hope Hardin mentions Null getting a ruling from the Minnesota Department of Administration that the Sheriff needs to release the fucking thing.
What the prosecutor and White are doing here is greasy AF, and should not be permitted. They are trying to rewrite the record, in an effort to do an end run around that, and deny the public their right to a record they are entitled to. Fuck that.