My son was in a fight outside a bar and later was arrested for assault. There were 6 witnessess that saw the fight and knew that it wasn't my son that started the fight it was the other man, and told my son they would give depicitoins if needed.
My son gave the depicitions from the witnessess to the police. When he went for the pre-trial, he was told by his lawyer there were no depicitions. There was one depicition from a friend of the victim but none that my son gave to the police. Isn't this withholding evidence?
Very confused mother

A couple of thoughts come to mind. Perhaps the police lost them, or they ended up in the lawyers office, not yet filed with his paperwork.

Your son will have to get them again, photocopy them, and give them directly to his lawyer.

I don't think it is withholding evidence if the police don't have them to give to the lawyer. They've likely been misplaced.

Hello confused mother:

Sure, it's withholding evidence. What?? You think the cops are the good guys?? Bwa, ha ha ha. The cops don't want evidence presented that FREES your son, and shows them to have made a mistake. That's not what cops do. They BUST people - not free them.

Your son needs a LAWYER.

excon

If the police did not personly talk to these witnesses, or if the DA does not think they are good ( like all your friends) they may chose not to use them.

This is why your attorney will have to talk to them and see if he wants to call them as witness and show that evidence to the court

Also understand in many states even if you are not the one that "starts" it, but if you had a chance to run away and did not, you can be charged also.

I don't know if you mean depositions - sworn testimony or signed statements or some type of conversation with the Police officers.

In my area the testimony of friends holds little weight, many people offer testimony and then don't want to testify, the statements are not factually correct when investigated or would make no difference in the outcome.

If your son was involved in the fight - it appears he was because he was arrested - it doesn't matter who started it.

This is not correct in the US - I routinely investigate matters and the statements are considered to be the work of the Police and not released to anyone except the DA who then makes them available, if appropriate, to the defense. Same with auto accidents - investigative reports not necessarily made available, including to the parties, particularly if charges are filed.

So, would it be a matter of course then that the Police would hand over all these statements to the DA, and the son in questions' lawyer, has no knowledge of them?

Just out of my own curiosity, why doesn't it make a difference if this kid was charged, if he didn't start the fight.

Would this not be a case of defending himself?

I can only tell you investigations I've done - I'm certainly not a Police Officer - but unless/until documents are used in a Court proceeding they are not released to the other side. Probably out of every 10 - possibly more - statements taken, 1 is used in Court. The rest are of no value. It is up to the Defendant to send someone out to get his own reports and statements - which is why I have a job!

The OP's son's Attorney will have to attempt to get the work product released and certainly would be provided with the statements IF they were to be used in Court.

On that subject - the interest of the Police in writing a report and interviewing witnesses is most definitely not the same interest as an investigator working on behalf of the accused.

If he only defended himself, had no chance to walk away, then I don't see the charges sticking. If he had the ability to walk away and did not, yes, he'll be charged. He'll also be charged if the other person was injured. The Police aren't going to decide that. The Judge will - if it gets that far.

I certainly don't know any more details about this than anyone else but it would appear to me that the overwhelming majority of believable witnesses did not believe the OP's son was not at fault in some way.

Again - in my area, from my experience.

Thank you, that makes sense.

It is frustrating hearing the details via a third party, and not hearing the other side of the coin.

Maybe there will be more information and detail on this.

Thanks again.

Hello Jake:

It sure could be. But, if the cops didn't witness the fight, they'll leave it for the court to figure it out. If the prosecutor didn't think he could win a conviction, he wouldn't have taken it this far.

The place for the depictions would be in court. The cops could care less. However, it's doubtful whether they would be entered into evidence in any case. The prosecutor has the right to cross examine the defense witnesses, and you can't cross examine a depiction.

The prosecutor will have to PROVE his case before the defendant even utters a sound. If he's not guilty, the prosecutor won't be able to do that.

excon

Your son's mistake was giving the "depictions" to the police. If there was any witness testimony to support his side he should have given them to his lawyer. His lawyer would then take their depositions and present copies to the prosecutor to get him to drop charges. If the prosecutor doesn't want to drop charges then they will be called as witnesses for the defense at trial. There could be a number of reasons the testimony of these witnesses were not included.

Thanks for the answering back. Things turned out fine, son didn't get charged