Ever wonder why the people complain about how inefficient government is? Well let me tell you a tale… I get a call one day from a secretary at a city prosecutor’s office asking me if I got a subpoena for a case that afternoon. I replied I had, but was going to wait until I got a call that I was needed before I showed up for court. I was told that the officers in the case had been “called in early” because the case was supposed to move quickly. I asked if she knew when I might be needed, and the reply was that another prosecutor said I should be there at the time on my subpoena (a half hour ago). Huge red flags went off in my mind. The time on the subpoena is never correct. Most of my court cases I’ve never even been needed on the same day listed on the subpoena, often not even the same week. Be that as it may, there is always the exception. So I threw on my court attire, grabbed up my case files, and headed on off to court. As I walked down the hallway in the courthouse, I noticed people with “juror” stickers on their shirts sitting outside the courtroom – not a good sign. When I walked in the judge was telling the court bailiff to bring in juror #14. This means that they hadn’t even selected a jury yet. Let alone had juror instructions, opening statements, direct/cross/re-direct on the case officer. Since I was to testify on a blood alcohol case, they would also probably have an officer testify on the field sobriety tests administered by another officer, and they would need to have the phlebotomist testify as to the blood draw before I could testify on my analysis and results in the case. Put simply, they couldn’t possibly get to me for 2-3 hours at a minimum. I tapped the prosecutor on the shoulder and gave him my number. Told him to call me when they were starting the witness before me, there was no reason for me to sit around for a few hours. Heck, I had work to do. I figured I would stop by the prosecutor’s office to let them know politely not to call me on cases until they were close to needing me. It’s not that I get paid a huge salary as a government forensic scientist, but it’s wasteful to have me sitting around for multiple hours doing nothing. I am impressed by other states where the prosecutor’s office is billed for witness time. Makes for a lot less hallway sitting. Something like that should really be put into place in Arizona – heck everywhere. The practice the prosecutors have of “stacking” witnesses in the hallway is irresponsible at least, borderline begging for a taxpayer investigation into wasted taxpayer dollars. Well in the prosecutors’ office, I couldn’t find the prosecutor that had told the secretary to tell me to get to court right away. While walking down the hall, I was pulled in by another prosecutor and consulted on another case. The talk lasted for 15 minutes or so, and I headed back to my office. I had a voicemail on my phone, and it was currently ringing. I answered and it was the officer from the current court case telling me the prosecutor needed me back in court. I checked my voicemail, and it was an earlier call from the same officer. It seems I had been called almost upon me leaving the courtroom. So I headed back to the courtroom. When I walked in, the judge was giving the jury their instructions – opening statements hadn’t even happened yet! So I sat in the back of the courtroom and played with my Treo Smartphone for about a half hour. During which time the first officer took the stand, and part of direct examination was started before they broke for lunch! The prosecutor told me he was sorry, but needed me there because he wasn’t sure if the other witnesses could be there soon enough in case the first officer got off the stand. I didn’t argue with him that even if that happened, no defense attorney worth his salt is going to let me get up there and testify as to my blood analysis without foundation laid by the officer administering the FSTs, and the phlebotomist. On the way out I commented that I had never even been interviewed, or had a discovery request for my report or case notes. The prosecutor said he would need me back by 1:15. At 1:30 I went back into the courtroom after lunch, and in the room was the judge, the defendant, the defense attorney, and the prosecutor – period. The prosecutor said he meant to call me, but the defendant had changed his plea when they got back from the lunch recess. This is why government is so inefficient. Those that are in power have no reason or incentive to be efficient. I understand not wanting the judge and the jury sitting around waiting on a witness, but there has to be a happy medium between that and multiple witnesses sitting in a hallway for multiple hours on cases – sometimes days. In this case my actual wait time wasn’t that bad, but I lost a good three hours out of my day making three trips back and forth to the courthouse. Imagine if prosecutor’s offices had to pay witness salaries out of their own budgets – even if the witnesses and the prosecutors all work for the same government entity (city, county or state). I guarantee there would be fewer witnesses sitting in a hallway for shorter periods of time. And as a taxpayer, I would rather have my forensic scientists working on cases, and my police officers out protecting the public, rather than sitting in a hallway acting as a security blanket for a prosecutor. /rant
I've got a question relating to that incident. Have you ever had to wait to testify in one case while you had to be in another courtroom for another trial? How would the judges handle that situation?
Ohh yeah. Then it gets into a total pissing match between judges. There is a general rule out here where superior (felony) court trump municipal (misdemeanor) court, and juvenile beats out an equivalent adult case. Then they break things down into oldest date of violation. That being said, I was stuck in a municipal court on a case I didn't even do the work, so anyone could have testified in the case with equal validity as me, while I was needed in another court on a multiple homicide case. The city court judge wouldn't dismiss me. I was just dumbfounded.
Hmmm, what can I say, you should download Bubble Trouble...it's an addictive game and time just flows by when you're playing it... More seriously, are you actually allowed to sit in the courtroomm when you're not testifying? I thought you could only be in the courtroom when you were xspeaking, so as no to be influenced, before or after. At least I know it's the way it works in England.
Normally we can't sit in the courtroom, but that is only if that rule is envoked by either lawyer. In this case it hadn't been.
I don't the see the problem with some wittnesses watching before they testify. Cleary an eye-wittness shouldn't watch of they have to identify the person, and they're watching other eye-wittnesses testify. But if an expert like yourself is waiting to testify about evidence, then there should be no problem if you watch.
And I agree with you in theory. If all expert witnesses were in fact impartial, testifying to only what the evidence says - like you see on TV shows - there wouldn't be a problem. But in this field that isn't the case. There are some definately "pro-police" and "anti-defendant" expert witnesses that testify on the side of the state. Them seeing other witnesses could very well sway they way they word answering in order to bolster previous witness testimony. That being said, the same argument can go for experts testifying for the defense. It isn't a perfect world, and in general the rule being envoked is a good thing.
I have a question--who usually conducts an inquest hearing? Are their lawyers involved or is it just the coroner?
None of the above. There are no inquest hearings or coroners. In Arizona cause/manner of death determinations are made by the medical examiner based on their analysis and documentation submitted by law enforcement agencies. There can be a determination of homicide by gunshot for example, without any suspect to be tried by the medical examiner staff. It is up to the prosecutor to convince a grand jury if there is sufficient evidence to file charges against a particular suspect, using the medical examiners report and all documentation avaliable from law enforcement at the time. Hope that makes sense.