by Scott Creighton (H/T ronjohn)
“For example, a newly disclosed index of hearings and motions made in the case shows 18th Judicial District Chief Judge William Sylvester has ordered prosecutors to provide a copy of a video to the defense but does not explain what the video contains.”
The motion is People’s Motion 8 as described in the Register of Action page 6 of 9… (click on image for larger view)
Defense was supposed to view the video by Aug. the 1st, but remember, the defense claimed just the other day that the prosecution has not been handing over evidence like they have been ordered to. Does that mean they haven’t been given the video as of yet?
UPDATE 2: (H/T Polaris) CBS is reporting that “sources” claim the video is of Holmes picking up a package of ammo from a Fed Ex office. Interestingly, the video also claims that the 90 packages delivered to Holmes which were reported before to have been delivered to his home, were actually ALL delivered to the University of Colorado medical campus. Remember, the university medical campus is owned by a guy who also owns a company which is in direct competition with Century 16 and they have sealed all their records in this case.
I’m not exactly sure what this means but a reader tipped me off to one of the documents released to the press in the Aurora Massacre case (Motion to Preserve and Produce Evidence (D-3)) which seems to imply that there were recordings “seized” by police which have yet to be released to the public. This document was one of those recently released (Aug. 13th 2012) as a result of the lawsuit brought by various media interests to unseal the evidence in the case.
Would they be cell phone videos inside the theater during the shooting or perhaps the security camera footage or even some hack who was recording the film to release it on the black market. Don’t know what this means but the defense was apparently very interesting in forcing the prosecution to preserve such recordings. (click on image for larger view)
Now, this could be a standard motion filed in courts these days since security camera videos are pretty much everywhere. But, I think it’s interesting that it’s the first article of the motion. Also of note is the second article of the motion requesting that the judge keep law enforcement from destroying their notes in this case, which apparently is standard operating procedure these days.