There seems to be several theories floating around... as to why Renee Martin is currently the only material witness for Harlow Cuadra and Joseph Kerekes' murder trial to have gone through a bond hearing. With this post, I hope to put those 'theories' to rest.
As I reported here on June 3, 2008... Renee Martin was in Pennsylvania to give a deposition (arrived in PA on Sunday... left Tuesday) and on the last day she was there, she was issued two subpoenas... one to attend the July 8-9 hearing, the other to attend the trial:
Sources tell me that the reason she was brought before PPO, was because an out-of-state-witness service was only valid in front of a judge, and that since she was already in PA, it would make the order binding. (see this post for further information on how these things usually work). Furthermore, if Renee were truly an uncooperative witness, do you really think she'd walk away with an "un-secured" bond?
As I reported here on June 3, 2008... Renee Martin was in Pennsylvania to give a deposition (arrived in PA on Sunday... left Tuesday) and on the last day she was there, she was issued two subpoenas... one to attend the July 8-9 hearing, the other to attend the trial:
Sources tell me that the reason she was brought before PPO, was because an out-of-state-witness service was only valid in front of a judge, and that since she was already in PA, it would make the order binding. (see this post for further information on how these things usually work). Furthermore, if Renee were truly an uncooperative witness, do you really think she'd walk away with an "un-secured" bond?
While 32 other witness have also received out-of-state subpoenas, why would the DA go through the expense of flying them all up to PA, paying for their airfare, lodging, meals, etc... for something that takes usually less than 10 minutes? Wouldn't it make more sense to simply do it when they come up for whatever hearing they've been subpoenaed for? (which they could certainly fight, but in the long-run, would likely lose... and with the expense of hiring an attorney... I can't imagine any will fight it).
I've also been informed that witnesses attending the July 8-9 hearing will actually be arriving on or before July 6th... that leaves July 7th wide-open for anything that needs to be done before the judge.
I've also been informed that witnesses attending the July 8-9 hearing will actually be arriving on or before July 6th... that leaves July 7th wide-open for anything that needs to be done before the judge.
