LSTD400

150 words reply to this 

If I were the prosecutor, I would discredit the potential testimony made by Joe as it is biased. Joe has known Scott Mayo since grade school making it bias. The question is why Joe did not act accordingly as a first responder and call 911? The statement was also made after 2am. How long before Joe wrote the actual statement. I checked dates and it the same day of event, but time period before statement was taken could change results and frame of mind Joe was in. 
2.  If I was the defense attorney, I would argue Dawn’s testimony due to potential memory issues as she stated she had writer’s block. Dawn reported she went to the bar to relax and the concerns would be what was Dawn’s mental state at that point and she had been drinking a few glasses of wine. Was Dawn intoxicated at this point and fatigued? Dawn also reported she “was deeply hurt” by Mayo’s comments to her. The attorney would call into question Dawn’s dislike towards Mayo and her testimony, creating bias. 
3.  Some conflicts in Dawn’s statements are she was a frequent bar customer. I did not get this from Dawn’s statement, because if she was, wouldn’t she know Mayo’s name and potentially be friendlier with him? The first week also said Dawn saw some of the event, but it appears she saw all of it. 
Joe the fireman was initially only seeing the event outside through a window, but then we find out he went inside the bar during the argument and witnessed the shooting in the bar. Joe also heard Scowen say to Mayo ““pay me or I will kill you”. Mayo reported in his statement that he told Scowen to stop yelling and waiving the beer bottle. Joe did not report that. 
4)  I believe all statements and testimony will be admissible, but will be reviewed based on bias. 
The police officer’s statement will be admissible as he wrote what he was told by Mayo, Joe and Dawn. 
Mayo’s testimony will be admissible, but intent will be examined based on conflicting statements in confession and what was said to the officer. 
Dawn’s statement will be admissible, but questioned based on potential intoxication. Dawn also reported Scott was drinking behind the bar, but Scott reported he was not drinking, but had a few drinks before his shift. 
Joe’s statement will be admissible but looked at as biased, but he did say Scott Mayo was a drunk.