The UVA Alleged Lacrosse Murderer Civil Rights Come First
The Virginia Prosecutor alleges that former student, George Huguely murdered ex-lacrosse star, Yeardley Love by inflicting blunt force trauma to her head. Now, we have learned that Huguely’s defense team has a different theory concerning Love’s death.
Huguely has hired his own expert pathologist who claims that Love’s death may not have been caused by an injury but by her use of alcohol and the drug Adderall (used to treat HDAD). Huguely’s defense team is investigating whether the combination of alcohol and this prescription drug caused Love’s heart to stop. Also, Huguely’s defense attorney’s now disputing that Love sustained a traumatic brain injury. To prove this defense claim, Huguely’s attorney, Francis Lawrence is seeking access to Love’s medical records. Not surprisingly the prosecutor and Love’s family are against any disclosure of the victim’s medical history.
As of now, the judge has decided that he will review Love’s medical records, in camera (or in chambers by himself), to determine what evidence is relevant and should be given to the defense.
As a former prosecutor, although painful, you have to be very careful with this defense request for information. No prosecutor wants to see the victim’s privacy invaded (even if the victim is deceased). However, the truth is that Mr. Huguely is on trial for his life and, at this point, he is presumed innocent. As a matter of law, Huguely’s presumption of innocence can only be destroyed after a jury deliberates his fate. Until that time, he has the absolute right to put on a vigorous defense to attack the prosecutor’s case.
Given this legal fact, if the court does not take every precaution to protect Huguely’s rights and ability to put on his defense, then the court will have committed error and any conviction will be subject to reversal. This not the situation the prosecution wants to face. There is no question that non-relevant medical evidence should be excluded from the trial but any close calls must be decided in Huguely’s favor. If the prosecutor is too aggressive in seeking to exclude evidence then he may actually have sabotaged his own case before it begins.
At times, the presumption of evidence can be a difficult concept especially in a case like this. But the belief of “innocent before being proven guilty” is the cornerstone of our legal system. Think of about it, if you were ever wrongly accused of a crime would you want to be “presumed innocent?”
My name is Christopher Fusco. I am the managing partner of Callahan & Fusco, LLC with offices in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.