REDACTED. 03/06/2015 Motion Event ID: E-Filed: N MOTION BY MEDIA PETITIONERS TO UNSUPPRESS THE JURY QUESTIONNAIRE.

Similar documents
REBEKKA HIGGS, KATHERINE SPENGLER, AND KRISTEN NELSON. THE PEOPLE ARE

REDACTED. 02/26/2015 Minute Order (No Print) Event ID: E-Filed: N COURTROOM 202 MONITOR THIS MORNING WAS XXX AND THIS AFTERNOON WAS XXX /CMR

REDACTED. 4/03/2015 Filing Other Event ID: E-Filed: N DOCUMENTS PRODUCED IN RESPONSE TO PSDT-7 SEALED ENVELOPE #197 /LKO

REDACTED. 01/30/2015 Minute Order (print) Event ID: E-Filed: N JURY TRIAL - DAY 9

REDACTED. 5/07/2015 Minute Order (print) Event ID: E-Filed: N JURY TRIAL DAY 63 MAY 7, 2015

REDACTED. 10/04/2013 Motion Event ID: MOTION REGARDING ORDERS TO PRODUCE RECORDS IN RESPONSE TO PSDT-3, PSDT-4 AND

6/24/2015 Minute Order (print) Event ID: E-Filed: N JURY TRIAL - DAY 91 JUNE 24, 2015

08/16/2013 Order Event ID: THE COURT ENTERS ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SPECIFIC DISCOVERY --

08/30/2013 Motion Event ID: DEF/ HOLMES, JAMES EAGAN ATTACHEMENTS - STD /JR. 08/30/2013 Motion Event ID:

09/06/2013 Letter Event ID: LETTER RECEIVED FROM MICHAEL C THEIS. 09/06/2013 Motion Event ID: HOLMES, JAMES EAGAN

09/27/2013 Motion Event ID: MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FILED BY THE OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL STD /30/2013 /REB

REDACTED MOTION TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH ORDER D [D-263] CERTIFICATE OF CONFERRAL

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL [D-267] CERTIFICATE OF CONFERRAL

Judge s Introductory Remarks. Center. My name is Carlos Samour, and I am the judge assigned to this division.

REDA TE MOTION FOR A CERTIFICATE TO COMPEL ATTENDANCE OF AN OUT OF STATE WITNESS FROM CERTIFICATE OF CONFERRAL

Criminal Law Table of Contents

In Order C-137, the Court addressed two requests for expanded media

Department 16 has prepared this document to assist counsel in scheduling motions and reporters in Department 16.

MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT TWENTY-SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUITS DIVISION 12 JURY TRIAL GUIDELINES AND DIVISION RULES

I, as well as all evidence and testimony of Dr. Reid's opinions and. Division: 202 ^COURT PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO

DEPARTMENT 34. Michael Paul Linfield. Telephone: (213)

PLEASE INCLUDE A FILING LETTER WITH ALL PROPOSED ORDERS SUBMITTED AFTER A HEARING.

MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT TWENTY-SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT DIVISION 5 JURY TRIAL GUIDELINES PRETRIAL MOTIONS COURTROOM RULES AND DECORUM

i :. i -,' ~. -.. '.OE:PtJTYOLERi(SL'''ERI.O~ COUfh FUll Ol~ COUllTy, G~

Superior Court of California County of Orange

DEPARTMENT C26 GUIDELINES HONORABLE GREGORY H. LEWIS

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT FIVE JUDGE COLLEEN K. STERNE. Departmental Requirements and Procedures

DEPARTMENT C9 PROCEDURES

JUDGE: Paul Maughan - Third District Court

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, ORANGE COUNTY DEPARTMENT C17 LAW AND MOTION AND TRIAL PROCEDURES JUDGE GLENDA SANDERS

Superior Court of California County of Orange County

HONORABLE KEITH MEYER 315 COURT STREET, ROOM 468 CLEARWATER, FL Judicial Practice Preferences Circuit Civil

STATE OF FLORIDA Ninth Judicial Circuit of Florida

SUPERIOR COURT, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR JUDGE/COMMISSIONER BENCH BOOK. Judge Andrew Stone Third District Court QUESTIONS :

WILLOUGHBY MUNICIPAL COURT LAKE COUNTY, OHIO JURY USE MANAGEMENT STANDARDS

Wyoming Circuit Court Judges Benchbook

NASSAU COUNTY YOUTH PART District Court Room 268

19 th Judicial Circuit Court Judge Janet Croom Guidelines and Procedures. Circuit Civil Jury Division (Updated: September, 2017)

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON C ATLANTA JUDICIAL CIRCUIT STATE OF GEORGIA * * * JUDGE SHAWN ELLEN LaGRUA

Q: HAVE I BEEN EXCUSED?

Chapter 6. Litigation Process (Federal and State) Now that you know about the structure of the court system, now you will learn about the process.

PRACTICE PREFERENCES JUDGE GREGORY G. GROGER

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE. JUDGE MELISSA R. McCORMICK DEPARTMENT C13. CLERK: Alma Bovard COURT ATTENDANT: As Assigned

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CLERMONT COUNTY, OHIO

The State s brief in response to the Cafaro defendants motion to enlarge time, previously filed under seal, shall be unsealed. The Cafaro defendants

P R E T R I A L O R D E R

JUDGE J. BRIAN JOHNSON CIVIL PRE-TRIAL AND TRIAL PROCEDURES FOR CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE J. BRIAN JOHNSON. (Revised February 8, 2018)

Wyoming Judges Benchbook

MONTANA UNIFORM DISTRICT COURT RULES

15A-903. Disclosure of evidence by the State Information subject to disclosure. (a) Upon motion of the defendant, the court must order:

P R E T R I A L O R D E R

PRACTICE PREFERENCES JUDGE GREGORY G. GROGER

Superior Court of California County of Orange

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Courtroom Guidelines, Procedures and Expectations for Civil Cases Assigned to Judge Gary L. Sweet Courtroom B Okeechobee County Courthouse

CRIMINAL PRE-TRIAL BEST PRACTICES

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR JUDGE/COMMISSIONER BENCH BOOK. JUDGE/COMMISSIONER: Jennifer Valencia Second District Court

EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT SEMINOLE COUNTY CIVIL/FAMILY DIVISION L PROCEDURES AND PRACTICES JUDGE DONNA L. MCINTOSH

Courtroom Guidelines, Procedures and Expectations for Civil Cases Assigned to Judge Elizabeth A. Metzger Courtroom B, Okeechobee County Courthouse

news Colorado Judicial Branch Michael L. Bender, Chief Justice Gerald Marroney, State Court Administrator

2014 Top Ten Best Practices List

news Colorado Judicial Branch Mary J. Mullarkey, Chief Justice Gerald Marroney, State Court Administrator

Fall, Criminal Litigation 9/4/17. Criminal Litigation: Arraignment to Appeal. How Do We Get A Case?

Supreme Court of the State of New York County of Nassau IAS Trial Part 22 Part Rules Updated: January 25, 2018

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY

Guidelines, Procedures and Expectations Orange County Circuit Civil Division 40 Judge Bob LeBlanc

PRACTICAL ADVICE ON TRIAL PROFESSIONALISM. By Judge John Erlick. The Courtroom Culture

Judicial Assistant s > ALWAYS copy opposing counsel(s) on correspondence to the Court

2:15-cr VAR-MKM Doc # 10 Filed 09/24/15 Pg 1 of 5 Pg ID 24 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT-LAW DIVISION COMMERCIAL CALENDAR V Judge Joan E. Powell

LIST OF CHAPTERS. Joseph J. Mellon, Esq. Thomas J. Tomazin, Esq. Lorraine E. Parker, Esq. Lauren E. Sykes, Esq. Krista Maher, Esq.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION : : : : : : : : : : :

SP00-3 Sealed Records Procedures Appellate and Trial Court Rules Standards for sealing. Proposal applies to civil and criminal proceedings

LOCAL RULES OF THE RIPLEY CIRCUIT & SUPERIOR COURTS INDEX

Overview of Pretrial & Trial Procedure. Basic Concepts. What is Proof (Evidence) David Hamilton City Attorney Reno & Honey Grove Tx.

JOSEPH M. LATONA, ESQ. 716 BRISBANE BUILDING 403 MAIN STREET BUFFALO, NEW YORK (716)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT. DIVISION [Number]

15B CIVIL RULES TABLE OF CONTENTS

Protocol for Judge Leo Bowman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Honorable Judge Thomas Ramsberger 545 First Avenue North, Room 200 St. Petersburg, FL JURY TRIAL WEEKS * ALL ONE (1) WEEK DOCKETS *

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNIFORM PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER. Civil No. 1:13-CV-1211 vs. GLS/TWD Andrew Cuomo, et al.

STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF JACKSON BUSINESS COURT DIVISION. via telephone (check one) /

S16A1842. GREEN v. THE STATE. Appellant Willie Moses Green was indicted and tried for malice murder

PRETRIAL ORDER (JURY TRIALS)

Wyoming Judges Benchbook

COMMON PLEAS COURT OF DARKE COUNTY, OHIO PROBATE DIVISION LOCAL RULES 1. RULE 53 (A) HOURS OF THE COURT

RULINGS ON MOTIONS. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on several motions filed by the Defendant on

VOIR#DIRE# # IN# # # LOUISIANA#CRIMINAL#TRIALS# # # # # # # #

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

P R E T R I A L O R D E R

Civil Litigation Forms Library

Practices for Part 3

IR E b"c ^VI^D JAN CLERKOFGOUR7 IUPREME COURT OF OHIO IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO STATE OF OHIO NO Plaintiff-Appellee

Alpena County. Version 1.0 JURY DUTY HANDBOOK

INDIVIDUAL PRACTICES OF JUDGE LOUIS L. STANTON

Mock Trial Practice Law Test

20 TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF COLORADO ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER SUBJECT: Expanded Media Coverage of Court Proceedings

INDIVIDUAL RULES AND PROCEDURES JUDGE SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN

Transcription:

REDACTED 03/06/2015 Motion Event ID: 000675 E-Filed: N MOTION BY MEDIA PETITIONERS TO UNSUPPRESS THE JURY QUESTIONNAIRE. STD 3 6 15 /LKO 03/06/2015 Order Event ID: 000676 E-Filed: N THE COURT ENTERS ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON MOTION BY MEDIA PETITIONERS TO UNSUPPRESS THE JURY QUESTIONNAIRE (C-187). COPIES SENT VIA EMAIL TO KAREN PEARSON, RICH ORMAN, JACOB EDSON, LISA TEESCH-MAGUIRE, GEORGE BRAUCHLER, SHERILYN KOSLOSKY, RHONDA CRANDALL, DANIEL KING, TAMARA BRADY, KRISTEN NELSON, CHRISTINA TAYLOR, AND STEVEN ZANSBERG. /AG 03/09/2015 Order Event ID: 000677 E-Filed: N THE COURT ENTERS ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON PEOPLE'S MOTION TO LIMIT THE PUBLIC DISPLAY OF SOME ADMITTED EXHIBITS, SPECIFICALLY AUTOPSY PHOTOGRAPHS, CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS CONTAINING IMAGES OF HOMICIDE VICTIMS, AND CRIME SCENE VIDEOS CONTAINING IMAGES OF HOMICIDE VICTIMS, AND TO LIMIT VIEWING TO THE PARTIES, TO THE COURT, AND TO THE JURY (P- 118). COPIES SENT VIA EMAIL TO KAREN PEARSON, RICH ORMAN, JACOB EDSON, LISA TEESCH-MAGUIRE, GEORGE BRAUCHLER, SHERILYN KOSLOSKY, RHONDA CRANDALL, DANIEL KING, TAMARA BRADY, KRISTEN NELSON, AND CHRISTINA TAYLOR. /JRZ 03/09/2015 Motion Event ID: 000678 E-Filed: N EX PARTE DEFENSE MOTION B SEALED ENVELOPE #184 STD 201 3 9 15 /LKO 03/09/2015 Order Event ID: 000679 E-Filed: N THE COURT ENTERS ORDER REGARDING DEFENSE'S MOTION FOR ORDER AUTHORIZING THE TRANSPORT OF MR. HOLMES (EX PARTE DEFENSE MOTION B). COPIES SENT VIA EMAIL TO SHERILYN KOSLOSKY, RHONDA CRANDALL, DANIEL KING, TAMARA BRADY, KRISTEN NELSON. REDACTED VERSION OF ORDER SENT VIA EMAIL TO KAREN PEARSON, RICH ORMAN, JACOB EDSON, LISA TEESCH-MAGUIRE, GEORGE BRAUCHLER AND CHRISTINA TAYLOR. BY COURT ORDER UNREDACTED ORDER WILL BE KEPT UNDER SEAL. 03/09/2015 Minute Order (print) Event ID: 000680 E-Filed: N JURY TRIAL - DAY 31 MARCH 9, 2015 JUDGE SAMOUR REPORTERS: TROYANEK MORNING; AMATO AFTERNOON THE COURT INFORMS THE PARTIES THAT PROSPECTIVE JUROR 575 HAS NOT SHOWN UP THIS MORNING. WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE COURT STAFF WILL RESCHEDULE PROSPECTIVE JUROR 575 TO APRIL 13, 2015 IN THE AFTERNOON. THE COURT GIVES COPIES OF PROSPECTIVE JUROR EMAILS 84 AND 85 TO THE PARTIES. BASED ON COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED, THE PARTIES STIPULATE TO RELEASE PROSPECTIVE JURORS 5204 AND 6191. THE PARTIES PROVIDE THE COURT STIPULATED RESPONSES TO EMAILS FROM PROSPECTIVE JURORS 397, 169, AND 470. THE COURT WILL RESPOND TO THOSE EMAILS AS PROPOSED. THE PARTIES ALSO STIPULATE TO EXCUSE PROSPECTIVE JURORS 639 AND 1280.

THE COURT GRANTS THE DEFENSES REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE A NOTICE OF INTENTION TO INTRODUCE EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO THE RESIDUAL HEARSAY EXCEPTION UNDER CRE 807. SPECIFICALLY, THE DEFENSE IS ASKING TO INTRODUCE A RECORDING OF A WITNESS S INTERVIEW BECAUSE THAT WITNESS IS NOW DECEASED. THE DEFENSE ALSO ASKS TO FILE AN EX PARTE MOTION WITH THE COURT. THE PEOPLE OBJECT. THE DEFENSE EXPLAINS THAT THE MOTION WOULD BE A REQUEST FOR A COURT ORDER TO TRANSPORT THE DEFENDANT SO THAT HE MAY UNDERGO A PROCEDURE. THE DEFENSE EXPLAINS THAT ANY FURTHER INFORMATION WOULD INVOLVE ONGOING WORK PRODUCT COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION PROTECTED BY THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE. THE TRANSPORTATION WOULD NOT CAUSE ANY DELAY IN THE TRIAL. THE COURT TAKES THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT. THE COURT MAKES A RECORD RELATED TO A QUESTION ASKED LAST WEEK BY A PROSPECTIVE JUROR ABOUT WHO MAKES THE DECISION WHETHER ANY CREDIBLE EVIDENCE OF INSANITY HAS BEEN PRESENTED BEFORE THE PROSECUTION HAS THE BURDEN TO PROVE SANITY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. THE COURT FINDS THAT THE INFORMATION BEING GIVEN TO PROSPECTIVE JURORS THUS FAR IS NOT IMPROPER; HOWEVER, THE COURT CONCLUDES THAT THE BETTER WAY TO PROCEED IS TO TELL PROSPECTIVE JURORS THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE THE BURDEN TO PROVE SANITY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH A COMMENT IN INSTRUCTION B:01 IN THE MODEL CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS. THE COURT GRANTS THE DEFENSE LEAVE TO FILE A WRITTEN MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE. THE DEFENSE WILL FILE THEIR MOTION LATER THIS WEEK. THE PEOPLE WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND, AND THE COURT WILL DECIDE AT THAT TIME WHETHER TO SET ORAL ARGUMENT ON THE MOTION. THE COURT CONDUCTS VOIR DIRE WITH THE GROUP OF FIVE PROSPECTIVE JURORS WHO APPEAR THIS MORNING. THE COURT AND THE PARTIES CONDUCT INDIVIDUAL VOIR DIRE WITH THE FIVE PROSPECTIVE JURORS. BY STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, PROSPECTIVE JURORS 458, 576, AND 577 ARE EXCUSED FROM JURY SERVICE IN THIS CASE. WITHOUT OBJECTION, PROSPECTIVE JURORS 574 AND 579 ARE ASKED TO RETURN FOR GROUP VOIR DIRE ON APRIL 13, 2015. AFTER THE MORNING BREAK, THE DEFENSE CLARIFIES THAT THE REQUEST TO FILE AN EX PARTE MOTION WITH THE COURT IS JUST REQUESTING AN ORDER FOR TRANSPORT. THE PEOPLE DID SOME RESEARCH DURING THE BREAK AND DO NOT OBJECT TO AN EX PARTE MOTION BEING FILED. THE DEFENDANT AND THE SAME ATTORNEYS ARE PRESENT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF MR. BRAUCHLER. PROSPECTIVE JUROR 596, WHO IS SCHEDULED THIS AFTERNOON, IS UNABLE TO APPEAR TODAY DUE TO A PERSONAL ISSUE. HE HAS BEEN RESCHEDULED TO 3/16/15 IN THE MORNING. THE COURT CONDUCTS VOIR DIRE WITH THE GROUP OF FIVE PROSPECTIVE JURORS WHO APPEAR THIS AFTERNOON. THE COURT CONDUCTS INDIVIDUAL VOIR DIRE WITH THE FIVE PROSPECTIVE JURORS. PROSPECTIVE JURORS 580, 583, 586, 590, AND 387 ARE EXCUSED BY STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES. THE PEOPLE ACKNOWLEDGE THEY RECEIVED THE COURTS ORDER SETTING A BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON THE PEOPLE'S MOTION TO LIMIT THE PUBLIC DISPLAY OF SOME ADMITTED EXHIBITS (ORDER P-118), WHICH WAS ISSUED WHILE THE COURT WAS IN SESSION THIS AFTERNOON. THE PEOPLE HAVE RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM ATTORNEY ZANSBERG INFORMING THE PEOPLE THAT HIS MEDIA CLIENTS DO NOT OBJECT TO MOTION P-118. BECAUSE MR. ZANSBERG DOES NOT REPRESENT ALL THE MEDIA MEMBERS THAT MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN MOTION P-118, THE COURT WILL KEEP THE BRIEFING SCHEDULE SET BY ORDER P-118. IF NO OBJECTIONS TO THE MOTION ARE FILED BY MARCH 13, THE COURT WILL VACATE THE MARCH 19 HEARING ON THE MOTION.

03/09/2015 Minute Order (No Print) Event ID: 000681 E-Filed: N COURTROOM 202 MONITORS TODAY ARE XXX IN THE MORNING AND XXX IN THE AFTERNOON. 03/10/2015 Notice Filed Event ID: 000682 E-Filed: N DEFENSE SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE OF ENDORSEMENT OF WITNESS PURSUANT TO RULE 16(II)(B)&(C)(D-283) SUPPRESSED ENVELOPE #185 STD 201 3 10 15 /LKO 03/10/2015 Notice Filed Event ID: 000683 E-Filed: N NOTICE OF INTENT TO INTRODUCE HEARSAY EVIDENCE (D-282) SUPPRESSED ENVELOPE #186 FILED BY COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENDANT STD 201 3 10 15 /LKO 03/10/2015 Minute Order (print) Event ID: 000687 E-Filed: N JURY TRIAL - DAY 32 MARCH 10, 2015 JUDGE SAMOUR REPORTERS: FIKANY MORNING; AMATO AFTERNOON THE COURT GIVES COPIES OF PROSPECTIVE JUROR EMAILS 87 AND 88 TO THE PARTIES. THE COURT ALSO GIVES THE PARTIES COPIES OF THE STIPULATED RESPONSES THAT WERE SENT BY COURT IN RESPONSE TO PROSPECTIVE JUROR EMAILS 80, 81, AND 82. THE PARTIES PROVIDE PROPOSED STIPULATED RESPONSES TO PROSPECTIVE JUROR EMAILS 85 AND 86. THE COURT ADOPTS THOSE STIPULATED PROPOSED RESPONSES. THE PARTIES STIPULATE TO EXCUSE PROSPECTIVE JUROR 3388. THE COURT CONDUCTS VOIR DIRE WITH THE GROUP OF SIX PROSPECTIVE JURORS WHO APPEAR THIS MORNING. THE COURT AND THE PARTIES CONDUCT INDIVIDUAL VOIR DIRE WITH THE SIX PROSPECTIVE JURORS. BY STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, PROSPECTIVE JURORS 602, 616, 622, 623, AND 626 ARE EXCUSED FROM JURY SERVICE IN THIS CASE. THE COURT GRANTS THE DEFENSES CHALLENGE FOR CAUSE WITH RESPECT TO PROSPECTIVE JUROR 597. THE DEFENDANT AND THE SAME ATTORNEYS ARE PRESENT. THE COURT INFORMS THE PARTIES THAT ALL FIVE SCHEDULED PROSPECTIVE JURORS HAVE SHOWN UP THIS AFTERNOON. THE PARTIES STIPULATE TO EXCUSE PROSPECTIVE JUROR 949 BASED ON PROSPECTIVE JUROR EMAIL 88. THE PARTIES PROVIDE A STIPULATED PROPOSED RESPONSE TO PROSPECTIVE JUROR EMAIL NO. 87. THE COURT ADOPTS THAT PROPOSED RESPONSE. THE COURT CONDUCTS VOIR DIRE WITH THE GROUP OF FIVE PROSPECTIVE JURORS WHO APPEAR THIS AFTERNOON. THE COURT AND THE PARTIES CONDUCT INDIVIDUAL VOIR DIRE WITH THE FIVE PROSPECTIVE JURORS. WITHOUT OBJECTION, PROSPECTIVE JUROR 732 IS ASKED TO RETURN FOR GROUP VOIR DIRE ON APRIL 13. PROSPECTIVE JURORS 630, 631, AND 635 ARE EXCUSED BY STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES. THE PROSECUTIONS CHALLENGE FOR CAUSE TO PROSPECTIVE JUROR 633 IS DENIED. 03/11/2015 Order Event ID: 000684 E-Filed: N THE COURT ENTERS ORDER SUPPRESSING: (1) THE DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO INTRODUCE HEARSAY EVIDENCE (D-282); AND (2) THE DEFENDANT'S SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE OF ENDORSEMENT OF WITNESS PURSUANT TO RULE 16(II)(B) & (C) (D-283) [C-189]. COPIES SENT VIA EMAIL TO KAREN PEARSON, RICH

ORMAN, JACOB EDSON, LISA TEESCH-MAGUIRE, GEORGE BRAUCHLER, SHERILYN KOSLOSKY, RHONDA CRANDALL, DANIEL KING, TAMARA BRADY, KRISTEN NELSON, AND CHRISTINA TAYLOR. /AG 03/11/2015 Minute Order (print) Event ID: 000688 E-Filed: N JURY TRIAL - DAY 33 MARCH 11, 2015 JUDGE: SAMOUR REPORTER: CARLIN THE COURT GIVES COPIES OF PROSPECTIVE JUROR EMAIL 87 TO THE PARTIES, ALONG WITH A COPY OF RESPONSE 86A RECEIVED FROM PROSPECTIVE JUROR 97, AND COPIES OF STIPULATED RESPONSES SENT BY THE COURT TO PROSPECTIVE JUROR EMAILS. THE COURT CONDUCTS VOIR DIRE WITH THE GROUP OF SIX PROSPECTIVE JURORS WHO APPEAR THIS MORNING. THE COURT AND THE PARTIES CONDUCT INDIVIDUAL VOIR DIRE WITH FIVE OF THE SIX PROSPECTIVE JURORS SCHEDULED FOR THIS MORNING. THE PARTIES STIPULATE TO EXCUSE PROSPECTIVE JUROR 644 PRIOR TO INDIVIDUAL VOIR DIRE. BY STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, PROSPECTIVE JURORS 650 AND 647 ARE EXCUSED FROM JURY SERVICE IN THIS CASE. WITHOUT OBJECTION, PROSPECTIVE JUROR 640 IS ASKED TO RETURN FOR GROUP VOIR DIRE. THE DEFENDANTS CHALLENGE FOR CAUSE WITH RESPECT TO PROSPECTIVE JUROR 646 IS DENIED. PROSPECTIVE JUROR 641 WILL RETURN FOR INDIVIDUAL QUESTIONING THIS AFTERNOON. THE DEFENDANT AND THE SAME ATTORNEYS ARE PRESENT. THE COURT AND THE PARTIES CONDUCT INDIVIDUAL VOIR DIRE WITH PROSPECTIVE JUROR 641. PROSPECTIVE JUROR 641 IS RELEASED BY STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES. THE COURT CONDUCTS VOIR DIRE WITH THE GROUP OF FIVE PROSPECTIVE JURORS WHO APPEAR THIS AFTERNOON. THE COURT AND THE PARTIES CONDUCT INDIVIDUAL VOIR DIRE WITH THE FIVE PROSPECTIVE JURORS WHO REPORTED FOR THIS AFTERNOONS SESSION. PROSPECTIVE JURORS 651 AND 657 ARE EXCUSED BY STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES. THE DEFENDANTS CHALLENGES FOR CAUSE WITH RESPECT TO PROSPECTIVE JURORS 658 AND 661 ARE DENIED. PROSPECTIVE JUROR 723 IS QUALIFIED FOR GROUP VOIR DIRE WITHOUT OBJECTION. 03/12/2015 Response Event ID: 000685 E-Filed: N PEOPLE'S RESPONSE TO MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS' MOTION FOR ORDER UNSUPPRESSING BLANK JUROR QUESTIONNAIRE (C-118) STD 201 3 12 15 /LKO 03/12/2015 Notice Filed Event ID: 000686 E-Filed: N PEOPLE'S SUPPLEMENTAL AND AMENDED NOTICE OF ENDORSEMENT (P-119) SUPPRESSED ENVELOPE #187 STD 201 3 12 15 /LKO 03/12/2015 Minute Order (print) Event ID: 000689 E-Filed: N JURY TRIAL - DAY 34 MARCH 12 2015 JUDGE SAMOUR REPORTERS: TROYANEK MORNING; AMATO AFTERNOON

THE COURT INFORMS THE PARTIES THAT ALL SCHEDULED PROSPECTIVE JURORS HAVE APPEARED THIS MORNING. THE COURT GIVES COPIES OF PROSPECTIVE JUROR EMAIL 90 TO THE PARTIES. BASED ON PREVIOUS COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED, THE PARTIES STIPULATE TO RELEASE PROSPECTIVE JURORS 4094 AND 97. THE COURT CONDUCTS VOIR DIRE WITH THE GROUP OF SIX PROSPECTIVE JURORS WHO APPEAR THIS MORNING. THE COURT AND THE PARTIES CONDUCT INDIVIDUAL VOIR DIRE WITH THE SIX PROSPECTIVE JURORS. BY STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, PROSPECTIVE JURORS 667, 668, AND 670 ARE EXCUSED FROM JURY SERVICE IN THIS CASE. WITHOUT OBJECTION, PROSPECTIVE JURORS 662, 663, AND 673 ARE ASKED TO RETURN FOR GROUP VOIR DIRE ON APRIL 13, 2015. THE DEFENDANT AND THE SAME ATTORNEYS ARE PRESENT EXCEPT MR. EDSON. THE COURT CONDUCTS VOIR DIRE WITH THE GROUP OF FIVE PROSPECTIVE JURORS WHO APPEAR THIS AFTERNOON. THE COURT AND THE PARTIES CONDUCT INDIVIDUAL VOIR DIRE WITH THE FIVE PROSPECTIVE JURORS. PROSPECTIVE JUROR 679, 681, 686, AND 1432 ARE EXCUSED BY STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES. WITHOUT OBJECTION, PROSPECTIVE JUROR 692 IS ASKED TO RETURN FOR GROUP VOIR DIRE. MR. ORMAN MENTIONS THAT THE GENERAL VOIR DIRE COMMENTS OF THE COURT INDICATE THAT DURESS IS A DEFENSE TO FIRST DEGREE MURDER. MR. ORMAN ARGUES THAT UNDER CRS SECTION 18-1-708, DURESS IS NOT AN EXCUSE FOR A CLASS ONE FELONY CHARGE. THE COURT APPRECIATES THE COMMENT, AND RESPONDS THAT THE VOIR DIRE WITH THE GROUP OF JURORS IS NOT MEANT TO BE TECHNICAL AND IT IS DIRECTED TOWARD LAY PEOPLE. THE COURT ASKS THE PEOPLE FOR CLARIFICATION ON ONE ASPECT OF MOTION P-118. THE PEOPLE INDICATE THAT THEIR PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO HAVE THE COURT INSTALL A SCREEN ON THE LARGE PILLAR IN THE GALLERY WHERE THE CCTV CAMERA IS MOUNTED, INSTEAD OF ROLLING IN A MONITOR. THE DEFENSE HAS NO OBJECTION. ALTHOUGH MR. ZANSBERG DOES NOT INTEND TO OBJECT, THE COURT WILL WAIT UNTIL TOMORROW TO RULE ON THE MOTION SINCE ANY RESPONSE IS DUE TOMORROW. THE DEFENSE WILL FILE TOMORROW A SUPPLEMENT TO THEIR ORIGINAL CHANGE OF VENUE MOTION AND REPLY. AT THAT TIME, THE COURT WILL LIKELY ASK THE PEOPLE TO FILE A WRITTEN RESPONSE. THE COURT WILL THEN DECIDE HOW TO PROCEED. 03/13/2015 Order Event ID: 000690 E-Filed: N THE COURT ENTERS ORDER SUPPRESSING PEOPLE'S SUPPLEMENTAL AND AMENDED NOTICE OF ENDORSEMENT (P-119). COPIES SENT VIA EMAIL TO KAREN PEARSON, RICH ORMAN, JACOB EDSON, LISA TEESCH-MAGUIRE, GEORGE BRAUCHLER, SHERILYN KOSLOSKY, RHONDA CRANDALL, DANIEL KING, TAMARA BRADY, KRISTEN NELSON, AND CHRISTINA TAYLOR. End of Case: 2012 CR 201522