Rollback of discovery reforms must be rejected

Gov. Kathy Hochul's proposed rollback of discovery reforms would return the state to the Dark Ages when prosecutors withheld evidence such as witness statements until literally the start of the trial. How was that ever fair? The governor proposes to do even worse than that: requiring district attorneys to turn over only the evidence they need for trial.

When a crime occurs, the police arrive, investigate and collect evidence. They get witness names and statements, take pictures, pull videos, obtain physical evidence, etc. They give that evidence to the district attorney. Why is any of that information proprietary to the DA?

That same information is now given to the defense who is able to properly investigate the facts and witnesses. Some evidence is useful to the prosecution. Some may be helpful to the defense. Some may be useless. Let the attorney familiar with the case decide on what is useful to their case.

Early and full disclosure allows for more informed plea discussions with both the client and the prosecutor. It allows for a more fair trial. This is not a game of poker in which you play the player not the cards. This is real life. You cannot try a car accident case without full disclosure of all evidence, whether it helps or hurts the case. That includes all the evidence gathered by the police, including their reports.

With a person's freedom on the line, why should the DA control what collected information the defense gets? Why should the DA be allowed to withhold most information gathered? If there is something sensitive, the DA can apply for a protective order. Evidence, collected by the police or prosecutor or someone at their request, belongs to the case, not just the DA.

The governor's proposal to turn the clock back is simply unfair.

Greg D. Lubow, Esq.

Tannersville