News Talk 94.1/AM 1600 Where The Upper Cumberland Talks
A Putnam County judge ruled Friday that prosecutors violated a defendants constitutional rights by withholding evidence in a rape case.
Judge Gary McKenzie said the District Attorneys Office committed a Brady violation when they failed to inform the defense about a material witness, identified as Hayden Moore. McKenzie said Moore’s testimony could have proved the defendant’s innocence.
“The state chose not to disclose this to the defense. The state chose not to even tell law enforcement, who was investigating the case, that Mr. Moore existed,” McKenzie said. “By doing this, the state was aware that they would not have to turn over any information of Mr. Moore by the rules of discovery or production of witness statements. Number one, this evidence at issue is favorable of the accused in impeaching both Mr. Moore and the alleged victim.”
The trial involved a 22-year-old Pickett County man charged with raping a 25-year-old Cookeville woman nearly two years ago. McKenzie ended up granting a motion from the defense to throw out Moore’s testimony.
Moore had stated that he heard the alleged crime during an inadvertent phone call from the alleged victim. McKenzie said the testimony contradicted statements made by the alleged victim and should have been turned over to the defense team prior to the trial taking place.
The 12 jurors ultimately found the defendant not guilty of the charges last week.
Brett Knight serves as the president of the Putnam County Bar Association and also represented the defendant. He said the Brady violation ruling will likely impact future cases and has already sparked conversation among fellow defense lawyers.
“I’ve had a lot of attorneys contact me with concerns about cases they currently have before the court with the same prosecutors,” Knight said. “But we’re hopeful that this will be a spring board to make changes to how cases are handled going forward. We hopeful that we’ll see cases more in line with that Judge McKenzie stated from the bench, and to be quite honest, with what this district has come to expect. The district attorneys office could not have gotten a more clear signal from the court that it’s time to make changes to how evidence of this type is handled going forward. ”
Knight said he believes repercussions will be coming as a result of Brady violation ruling. He said the judge and defense team do have the option of filing an ethics complaint with the Tennessee Board of Ethical Responsibility.
