Three Questions

[Florid-aise]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? Florida

FACTS KNOWN
A known crime scene, the evidence thereon having been blatantly "tampered with" and/or removed.

Question 1

When does the State Attorney become a "material participant" in tampering with evidence of a known crime scene, if the State Attorney delivers the very evidence itself of such tampering and/or removal of crime scene evidence, in discovery production to the defense?

Question 2

If the answer to Question 1 is yes, then when, if, and under what conditions must the State Attorney voluntarily disqualify itself from the prosecution?

Question 3

If the State Attorney fails or refuses to voluntarily disqualify itself from the prosecution, in a known conflict of interest, appearance of impropriety, or actual or specific prejudice, does that and/or would that, constitute a "neglect of duty"?

 

[CdwJava]

A known crime scene, the evidence thereon having been blatantly "tampered with" and/or removed.

Care to elaborate? What exactly is a "known crime scene"? And in what way was evidence "tampered" with?

When does the State Attorney become a "material participant" in tampering with evidence of a known crime scene, if the State Attorney delivers the very evidence itself of such tampering and/or removal of crime scene evidence, in discovery production to the defense?

I would assume that if the DA actually manipulated the evidence or had part in the cover up of said evidence he would have committed a criminal act.

Can you be a little more sepcific as to what is going on? I think an argument can be made for just about any position based upon the situation as presented.

If the answer to Question 1 is yes, then when, if, and under what conditions must the State Attorney voluntarily disqualify itself from the prosecution?

Probably when he is criminally charged with tampering with evidence. Or, if a judge or another qualified court removes him.

If the State Attorney fails or refuses to voluntarily disqualify itself from the prosecution, in a known conflict of interest, appearance of impropriety, or actual or specific prejudice, does that and/or would that, constitute a "neglect of duty"?

Too broad ... which of those do you contend exists? "Appearance of impropriety" is not likely enough to force him to recuse himself - and even a conflict of interest is not likely to compel him to pull out.

What is your point with all this? Is there something specific?

- Carl

 

[Florid-aise]

Care to elaborate? What exactly is a "known crime scene"? And in what way was evidence "tampered" with?

In this instance, a "known crime scene" is one where an alleged crime supposedly occurred. By extension of this definition, it is important to note, that the knowledge of a pending criminal prosecution must be with the evidence "tamperer"; which in this case is undeniable.

I would assume that if the DA actually manipulated the evidence or had part in the cover up of said evidence he would have committed a criminal act.

This response of yours goes to the very heart of my question. As we all know, it is the State Attorney that brings a criminal charge into being, and likewise, it would also be the State Attorney who would NOT bring a criminal charge into being...especially when it would involve one of or a number of, the junior members of the State Attorney's Office. [Bad, Bad publicity, you understand].

Can you be a little more sepcific as to what is going on? I think an argument can be made for just about any position based upon the situation as presented.

This is not the best of available means to become the most specific here. I do not dodge your question, I feel it encumbent upon me to use some degree of modicum and discretion at this moment...things is really heating up.

Probably when he is criminally charged with tampering with evidence. Or, if a judge or another qualified court removes him.

Who would remove the State Attorney himself, when it is the duty of the State Attorney himself to remove any prosecutor violating any law? Who then, brings the criminal charge against the State Attorney himself, if not the State Attorney, himself?

Too broad ... which of those do you contend exists? "Appearance of impropriety" is not likely enough to force him to recuse himself - and even a conflict of interest is not likely to compel him to pull out.

In this specific instance, there are well over 50 other such officially recorded instances where this very same State Attorney has voluntarily disqualified the Office, just to avoid even the "appearance of impropriety"; rather, than in this instance, actual and specific impropriety.

What is your point with all this? Is there something specific?

As I belive BelizeBreeze made mention of to you briefly, I am working on a particular train of thought just now. Yes, there is something specific and being handled, and being handled directly to the point just now.

 

[CdwJava]

Okay ... then if it's "being handled directly to the point", why are you bringing this up? The whole query is just too broad to respond to.

- Carl

 

[Florid-aise]

Okay ... then if it's "being handled directly to the point", why are you bringing this up?

Let me expand that comment by reporting that it is 'being handled directly to the point....that sufficient known authority to do as exists right now, is being done...with the goal in mind to discover and/or find more controlling authority'.

Maybe that will help somewhat.

The whole query is just too broad to respond to.

As being a definitive point of law. Irrefutable attorney misconduct and mandatory misconduct reporting rules imposed by the Florida Supreme Court, I would disagree with your assesment of the issue being too broad. At least until a more specific instance is permitted to be disclosed.