Thompson's Order for Second Trial
It is noteworthy that Judge Thompson SPECIFICALLY REFRAINED from granting
the new trial for the reason that the verdict was contrary to the law or to the weight of
the evidence. He also SPECIFICALLY REFRAINED from giving any weight to any
claims of "new evidence." In plain English, that means the ruling for a second trial was
made in spite of the fact the first trial's outcome was lawful, and consistent with the facts
of the case. It also means the ruling for a second trial had nothing to do with any "new
evidence."
Thompson's ruling that Moore didn't get a fair trial was "based entirely upon the
prosecution's failure to comply with this Court's orders regarding discovery"--and he
goes on to say it was "evidence" that was actually given to the defense, not just quickly
enough. He didn't give any specifics--he only said some things were released six weeks
before trial, just a few days prior to trial (presumably referring to the fifth floppy disk
and new DNA standards), and during the course of the trial (referring to the bloody
footprint that the defense team had actually received many months before trial and
"forgot").
Thompson goes on to say he had read the State's response, and "finds no reason to
deny the defendant's motion." This is in spite of the LAW, which clearly states the
burden is on the defense lawyers to prove their claims, which they were never required
to do. Further, the LAW says the defense lawyers must specifically prove how the
defendant's trial was prejudiced by the "evidence withheld," something that still hasn't
even been addressed by Judge Thompson.
In summary, Judge Thompson had to ignore the facts AND the law in order to hold
the first trial for naught. And he'll have to do the same thing to dismiss all the charges
against Moore and set him free. He even has to ignore his OWN PREVIOUS rulings to
do it--like when he explained to the CCA that justice would not be served by dismissing
the charges--in a document in which he repeatedly misstates the YEAR that hearings
took place. But, of course, he's ignored his own rulings before in this case, like when
he said in trial he was "fine" with the new standards for interpreting the DNA, and then
later ruled that this was "evidence withheld" to justify a second trial. He's forgotten the
defense lawyers admitted to forgetting about the bloody footprint, too, and used that as a
justification for a second trial.
The "FIX" has been in for a long time. I don't believe such sleazy tactics on the part
of a judge are common. They do occur, but they aren't common. What is even more
uncommon is how blatant it has been, and how STUPIDLY it has been done. It is
astounding that the judge can't remember the DNA--but is apparently the only person in
Morgan County that can decipher Brother Powell's incoherent babbling.
the new trial for the reason that the verdict was contrary to the law or to the weight of
the evidence. He also SPECIFICALLY REFRAINED from giving any weight to any
claims of "new evidence." In plain English, that means the ruling for a second trial was
made in spite of the fact the first trial's outcome was lawful, and consistent with the facts
of the case. It also means the ruling for a second trial had nothing to do with any "new
evidence."
Thompson's ruling that Moore didn't get a fair trial was "based entirely upon the
prosecution's failure to comply with this Court's orders regarding discovery"--and he
goes on to say it was "evidence" that was actually given to the defense, not just quickly
enough. He didn't give any specifics--he only said some things were released six weeks
before trial, just a few days prior to trial (presumably referring to the fifth floppy disk
and new DNA standards), and during the course of the trial (referring to the bloody
footprint that the defense team had actually received many months before trial and
"forgot").
Thompson goes on to say he had read the State's response, and "finds no reason to
deny the defendant's motion." This is in spite of the LAW, which clearly states the
burden is on the defense lawyers to prove their claims, which they were never required
to do. Further, the LAW says the defense lawyers must specifically prove how the
defendant's trial was prejudiced by the "evidence withheld," something that still hasn't
even been addressed by Judge Thompson.
In summary, Judge Thompson had to ignore the facts AND the law in order to hold
the first trial for naught. And he'll have to do the same thing to dismiss all the charges
against Moore and set him free. He even has to ignore his OWN PREVIOUS rulings to
do it--like when he explained to the CCA that justice would not be served by dismissing
the charges--in a document in which he repeatedly misstates the YEAR that hearings
took place. But, of course, he's ignored his own rulings before in this case, like when
he said in trial he was "fine" with the new standards for interpreting the DNA, and then
later ruled that this was "evidence withheld" to justify a second trial. He's forgotten the
defense lawyers admitted to forgetting about the bloody footprint, too, and used that as a
justification for a second trial.
The "FIX" has been in for a long time. I don't believe such sleazy tactics on the part
of a judge are common. They do occur, but they aren't common. What is even more
uncommon is how blatant it has been, and how STUPIDLY it has been done. It is
astounding that the judge can't remember the DNA--but is apparently the only person in
Morgan County that can decipher Brother Powell's incoherent babbling.