I’ve asked this in other threads but never got a good answer so I’ll ask again:
I thought in discovery the defense is only allowed to subpeona materials that could lead to evidence in their defense.
They are being sued for illegally audio recording the plaintiffs without their knowledge or consent. That’s all they are being charged with—not slander, false accusation, etc. So what would be allowed to be subpeonaed in discovery? How would ACORN’s records of misdeeds lead to evidence that they did not record them without their consent?
I hope I’m wrong, but it seems to me that none of ACORN’s crimes will ever be revealed in the discovery phase of this trial. And I don’t see how the reporters can prove that they didn’t record audio without the employees’ knowledge.
Any lawyers out there, or anyoneone who truly has knowledge and/or experience with the law please answer.
Any material that's relevant to their case, which can actually be quite encompassing given the competency (or incompetency) of plaintiff and defense counsel, respectively.
But (there's always a butt), I don't believe that discovery for the defense would be the treasure trove of information I'm sure many would hope for. For defense counsel, most of their case would probably center on refuting any attempt by plaintiffs to demonstrate defendant's cognizance of the relevant Maryland Wiretapping statute. For that reason, I would guess that the defense would be very limited in scope - by design of defense counsel alone.
Having said that, I would like to read the actual complaint to see exactly what they (ACORN) are pleading. Depending what they're arguing, could expose themselves to more intrusive discovery motions by the defense.