Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Evidence Discovery topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Prosecutor says Facebook screen recording provided but texts unavailable; PC affidavit later located in harassment case
Summary
In a harassment case, the prosecutor told the court a screen recording of Facebook messages was provided to the defense, that text-message receipts were unavailable because the victim's phone auto-deletes after 30 days, and that a probable-cause affidavit previously missing from the file was located and shared.
At a hearing in the 24 CCR docket, the prosecutor told the court that a screen recording of Facebook messages between the defendant and the alleged victim had been obtained and uploaded to defense counsel, and that text-message receipts were not available because the victim’s phone setting deletes messages after 30 days.
“Unfortunately, we do not have any text message receipts because the victim's phone automatically deletes messages after 30 days,” the prosecutor said. The defense had requested a complete set of communications; the prosecutor said the state had recently provided additional discovery materials and a screen recording of Facebook messages to defense counsel.
The prosecutor also told the court that a probable-cause (PC) affidavit had not been attached to an earlier digital file but was found in the paper case file and subsequently shared with defense counsel along with a party data sheet. “Looking back at the case, I did discover that there was no PC affidavit. It was actually buried in the case file. So I went ahead and shared that, as well as the party data sheet,” the prosecutor said.
Defense counsel described efforts to assemble “the whole world of texts or communications” involved; additional discovery had been uploaded the day before the hearing, according to defense counsel. The court set a pretrial status conference for Oct. 16 at 9 a.m.
The transcript indicates the missing PC affidavit and the lack of text receipts were matters the state addressed as part of routine discovery production rather than a contested evidentiary dispute at the hearing.
