A Douglas County judge Wednesday afternoon declared a mistrial just minutes before jurors were scheduled to hear opening arguments in the trial of a 21-year-old woman accused in a December burglary near the Kansas University campus.
Tom Bath, defense attorney for Shelby Sprauer, asked District Judge Kay Huff to grant a mistrial based on phone records Lawrence police detectives had collected in the case.
Douglas County District Attorney Charles Branson said there were specific records that neither side had reviewed among the nearly 700 pages.
“The state did not object to the mistrial to give the defense time to review those records,” Branson said.
Huff dismissed the 12 jurors who were selected Wednesday morning and scheduled Sprauer’s new trial for Aug. 3. Spauer faces counts of conspiracy to commit burglary and aggravated burglary, as prosecutors accuse her of participating in a scheme to rob an apartment resident late on Dec. 3 in the 1100 block of Louisiana Street.
Of her three co-defendants, Kayla Kling, 20, pleaded no contest in April to one count of attempted burglary and Michael Hammond, 20, pleaded no contest to two counts of conspiracy to commit burglary. A third co-defendant, Kyle Peterson, 21, has a trial scheduled for June 24.
Comments
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 2 years ago
"Douglas County judge declares mistrail minutes before trial starts"
Must have been a fork in the trail, and they took the wrong trail.
jhawkinsf 2 years ago
I made the same spelling error yesterday in one of my posts.
Kontum1972 2 years ago
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
jafs 2 years ago
Yes.
Because our system operates on a presumption of guilt, of course.
smitty 2 years ago
Tom Bath, defense attorney for Shelby Spauer, asked District Judge Kay Huff to grant a mistrial based on phone records Lawrence police detectives had collected in the case.
Douglas County District Attorney Charles Branson said there were specific records that neither side had reviewed among the nearly 700 pages.
Na-aah, never..couldn't happen .....with all that transparency ....must be incompetence..the lesser of many possibilities?
Our LPD detectives do get a lot of negative publicity over the years. IMHO, changing to an honest form of LE for the LPD is a major struggle. Surely all of us wish the LPD the best in their endeavor to provide an integrity bound LE agency for the citizens of Lawrence.
This snafu by the LPD detectives was caught before the trial by a defense attorney that earned their keep. How many other cases have the detectives been involved in that did not expose the hidden information is a concern.
Thank you JW, for connecting the dots.
formerfarmer 2 years ago
It said the defense needs to go over the phone records, it did not say the detectives did not review the info. Do you really believe they would submit records for the prosecution if they had not reviewed them. Branson stated neither side had reviewed all records. I am sure he was referring to the prosecutor and defense attorney.
smitty 2 years ago
neither side had reviewed among the nearly 700 pages....Stated it another way
Where were the records that neither defense or prosecution were aware of them until now?
Doesn't sound like the DA's office was informed by the LPD detectives(?).
Often enough the forum will produce a disparaging comment from LE toward the DA's office. The DA isn't the one who snafu'ed this one.
JimmyJoeBob 2 years ago
Why would the Police withhold 700 pages Smitty? It doesnt make sense. I doubt you know what is going on unless you work for the DA which I know you don't
smitty 2 years ago
What do you surmise from this?
Tom Bath, defense attorney for Shelby Spauer, asked District Judge Kay Huff to grant a mistrial based on phone records Lawrence police detectives had collected in the case.
Douglas County District Attorney Charles Branson said there were specific records that neither side had reviewed among the nearly 700 pages.
“The state did not object to the mistrial to give the defense time to review those records,” Branson said.
To me the question is how come there is 700 pages of data in this case in the possession of the LPD detectives that no one else was aware existed? I got another logical question..how did the defense attorney realize there were 700 pages in the possession of the LPD detectives?
Branson couldn't have dropped the ball on records he never knew about. The defense attorney some how became aware of them.
Too many problems over recent history of LPD detectives snafus not to question tier part in this mistrial. Be patient and watch to see the effect that the "unreported" records have on the defence. Neither corruption or incompetence(I don't think so) is acceptable and the blue walled house of cards comes tumbling down.
somebodynew 2 years ago
smitty - I know this might be hard for you to comprehend, but did you ever think that maybe the detectives didn't have those 700 pages. Quite possibily they had been turned in (probably electronically instead of paper) and neither the Prosecution or the Defense happened to look at that one disc????? You know that does happen. There are some attorneys (shocking, I know) that don't really look at all of the stuff turned in until the last minute. Not that it is right, but it happens.
It is not automatically the LPD's fault for everything that goes wrong in the world. And just how would Mr. Bath know if the detechtives didn't turn something in???
smitty 2 years ago
Both the defence and the prosecutor, really?....Still don't have a reasonable nor believable answer to the reason why the JW noted the 700 pages from the detectives missing until the mistrial.
JimmyJoeBob 2 years ago
I think that both Branson and Bath just simply overlooked the evidence. If not Bath would have accused the Police of misconduct. Both parties are being too for it to be the cops fault
somebodynew 2 years ago
JimmyJoe you are correct. I know Tom Bath and he is an excellent attorney and would have no problem pointing out misconduct if it were present. Especially if it would help his client.
smitty 2 years ago
Thus the mistrial without the exposure of why the LPD detectives records were unavailable.
The lack of claims of misconduct by Bath would not be necessary unless the mistrial was not granted.
smitty 2 years ago
Judge Huff decided the mistrial before she entered the court room from information and conversations that do not go on the records as is the side bar off the transcript. Perhaps a political decision by Judge Huff to decide while the details of the decision are not part of the public records beyond what we have been allowed to know.
Our newest judge, Huff is definitely is not tolerating the records game that the LPD plays, though.
K U D O S to Judge Huff.
pace 2 years ago
I vote, I pay property taxes. I am never called to be on jury.
LadyJ 2 years ago
Being called this month for a second time. They make you answer questions to return to make sure you might not be biased. One question should be "have you been a recent victim of a crime"? That might make someone a bit biased. Silly people, I can't wait.
JimmyJoeBob 2 years ago
Smitty The article never said the pages were missing, Nor did it say the attorneys didnt have the opportunity to review the material. It said both attorneys never reviewed the material. You are fabricating things now.
somebodynew 2 years ago
Now??? - you mean again.
smitty 2 years ago
Paraphrased what the JW stated. ...that's all
**Tom Bath, defense attorney for Shelby Spauer, asked District Judge Kay Huff to grant a mistrial based on phone records Lawrence police detectives had collected in the case
......Douglas County District Attorney Charles Branson said there were specific records that neither side had reviewed among the nearly 700 pages....
This statement also implies that of those 700 pages had been available...also implies that Branson had seen some of those pages....still no reasonable explanation as to the 700 unrevealed, aka missing pages(?) that created a mistrial. This article is a play on words that does not answer these questions....JW journalism is known for poor local coverage and not even a reason coverage of the situation presented.
Between the JW.....George Diepenbrock can do better.......the DA's quote and the reputation of the LPD detectives.....we only have a bare bones manipulated version of what lead to the mistrial.....and you say I've fabricated with questions from intelligent observations,now and over time.
To not ask questions of the LPD detectives contribution would be to ignore past problems centered on the LPD detectives. Then the same people who diss me are the same ones who have posted disparaging comments about their(LPD?LE) problems with Branson.
For you to center on me in lieu of the obvious questions presented in the JW's read between the lines method of journalism only strengthens the existing political problems/questions between the DA's office or the LPD and most probably, both...are at fault.
The finger pointing will go away when the problems are fixed and enough time of no more problems has time to regain some respect and trust.
Enough...much of our country is fed up with the jerk around by authorities on all levels.
JimmyJoeBob 2 years ago
Good point.
smitty 2 years ago
It's that double standard I wrote about when you sent me this agitated e-mail from recent disappearing when I quoted or referenced the JW as a the source of my statements.
You have received a notice from www2.ljworld.com: Whitney Mathews sent you a message.
Your comments were removed because they contained libelous and defamatory content and accused people of committing crimes without documented proof. When people post comments about you that violate the TOS, I also remove them, which is something I've done a lot of lately. So, no, there is not a double standard. Say whatever you want about the rules, but they apply to everyone (including you).
Speaking of rules, you've had plenty of chances to correct this behavior, yet you continue to repeat it despite me sending you multiple messages and suggestions. So the next time you post libelous and defamatory content about specific people without documented proof, I will ban your account without hesitation.
Whitney**
According to your above stated e-mail, I have broken JW rules...however the tactics have changed since that e-mailWhitney states:"Speaking of rules"* with exaggerated comments..... like sent me "multiple messages"....can you say two(2 total in several months)... both posted on the forum by me ....Nothing to hide....which do not warrant removal of JW archive supported comments....buttttt....the argumentative off subject provocateurs were allowed to continue their ad hominem attacks even though those are clearly against the JW forum's own rules.
.....now the exacerbated bury the article tactics are unethically at work, IMO, but my comments are not being disppeareded as they were at the time of this double standard scolding e-mail.
Remember when Chad jumped my arse on a chat and immediately back peddled? He was totally wrong but had the backbone/ethics to make an attempt to correct his actions, unlike recent JW actions. Chad was totally in front of the readers of the on-line version, and not hidden through e-mail threats though so public apology was the proper way to address the difficult issues, not censorship or threats of censorship. Joel Mathis was most likely the force behind that immediate back track.
JimmyJoeBob 2 years ago
Who is Smitty even talking to.
somebodynew 2 years ago
Herself (and whoever else is in there).
equalaccessprivacy 2 years ago
My condolences to anyone forced into dealing with the incompetent and dishonest, pathetic excuse for a criminal injustice system down at the Douglas County Law Enforcement Center. Lies and conflict-of-interest politics are the order of the day. Even the judges are crooked.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.