WEEK 5 FORUM 2 SANTOS
If you were the prosecutor, how would you discredit the potential testimony of Joe The Fireman?
One of the biggest issues that I see from fireman Joe’s statement is that he is a good friend of the defendant. His statement can be swayed towards benefiting Mr. Mayo because they have a personal relationship. I can immediately bring up the credibility issues in his statement “I have never seen the man before”. In my opinion that might not be possible due to the fact that Mr. Scowen was a regular. Joe obviously frequents that specific bar why would he go there at 2 am? He clearly is trying to defend Joe by saying that he was scared and shaken. It seems to me that he is trying to minimize the situation to self-defense.
2) If you were the defense attorney, how would you discredit the potential testimony of Dawn Dietz?
In my honest opinion the statement of Dawn Dietz seems far-fetched and can be discredited. One of the biggest issues that I have is the behavior she described of Mr. Mayo. I believe that Mr. Mayo is a good natured person but did an honest mistake on shooting Mr. Scowen. I would put into question that Mr. Mayo called her a “red neck”. It is hard to believe that an owner of a public establishment would allow anyone to disrespect a customer. Mr. Mayo does not have a criminal past or anything that would indicate an aggressive behavior.
3) Discuss some of the conflicts in the statements made by both Dietz and Joe and the facts provided in week 1.
Joe originally said that he was seeing the events unfolding through a window while sitting in a patio. On his statement he said he saw it through a window and ran in when the shooting happened. That is a different account on what he said on the written sworn statement provided. On the other hand Ms. Dietz is a frequent customer in the original report which contradicts completely her written statement. She is supposedly a writer that suffers from writers block and occasionally looks for a change of environment. This clearly seems to minimize her regularity in the bar which is a contradiction.