But , IF the verbal testimony hadn’t been tainted/destroyed by the prosecurtor’s office by State approved technicians,,
wouldn’t that fact be presented to the jury as well ?
Since the State destroyed any evidence of the existance / truth of that testimony , doesn’t that weaken the testimony of ‘Dee Dee’/ Rachel ?
I don’t understand what you are saying. Do you mean the “mystery witness” taped her conversation with Martin and the tape ended up destroyed?
Yes. There should be a jury instruction as well regarding what inferences the jury can draw when evidence is destroyed.