The trial for the man accused of shooting and killing a person outside a downtown Lawrence nightclub has been postponed again.
The trial of Rashawn T. Anderson, originally scheduled for Monday, had been pushed back last month to March 5 so defense attorney Mark Manna could have time to watch 143 interviews that police videotaped during the investigation. But because of prosecutors' scheduling conflicts, the trial was pushed back even further, Manna said.
The trial now is scheduled to begin April 16.
Anderson faces first-degree murder charges in the death of Robert Earl Williams, 46, who was shot and killed Feb. 5 outside the Granada, 1020 Mass.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
jafs (anonymous) says…
If I understand this correctly, the crime will be over a year old before it comes to trial. What takes so long? Didn't his attorney have time to review evidence before now? What about the right to a "speedy" trial? Has the defendent been in jail for all of this time (possibly unfair) or out on the streets (possibly a danger to others). Either way, this seems too long to me.
homechanger (anonymous) says…
The DA does not have time to prosecute right now. A conflict in schedual. Murder trial will get in the way of more pressing business.
Informed (anonymous) says…
Read a little further, plumber...
"But because of prosecutors' scheduling conflicts, the trial was pushed back even further, Manna said.
The trial now is scheduled to begin April 16."
So, that means the delay to March 5 was at the request of the defense. The rescheduling to April 16 is because of the prosecutor (that means the DA's office).
jafs (anonymous) says…
Either way, it's already been over a year - what takes so long?
daman (anonymous) says…
Hold on "informed". The defense asked for the continuance to review tapes (that he should have reviewed much sooner). That aside, the new date given at the defendant's request created a scheduling conflict for the prosecutor, so the judge had to go further out. That's not the prosecutor's fault, they were ready to go when it was originally set. I'll assume the prosecutor has more than one case pending.
Just a stall tactic by the defense, common practice. Court's by into it because they don't want to get reversed for denying the continuance. Defense hope "things" will happen to witnesses, loss of memory, disappear, move away, go to war in Iraq, etc... Most of the time, continuances help the defense, not the State.