The defense attorney in a sexual assault case sent multiple subpoena duces tecum to the victim, the victim's boyfriend, and the victim's friend for any photographs depicting the victim from a month and a half time frame after the rape. I filed a motion to quash as photos are not favorable or relevant to defense, violation of crime victim's rights, etc. The judge denied the motion to quash. The photos have not been seen by judge or defense yet but I have viewed them. The photos are very private in nature, obviously. I believe the defense is trying to show that she couldn't have been raped since she's taking and sending out nude photos right after, or just generally promiscuous.
Any ideas on what I can file to protect this young woman's privacy and not turn over all these private images?
Does this recent opinion from the El Paso COA help any? The DA's office out there prevailed, but only after a major fight with its local defense bar over tactics like that.
https://www.tdcaa.com/case-summaries/?_paged=6 (See the In re State entry)
That was a really good case that seemed on point. I copied a lot from their motions and mandamus. The problem is that case involved a subpoena for the physical phone for a download and this is for actual photos/content from the phone.
The argument was that it's like sending a subpoena duces tecum for a doctor's entire computer versus just for a certain patient's medical records. There are some limitations to that argument but there is also a point.
|Powered by Social Strata|
© TDCAA, 2001. All Rights Reserved.