Look — I get it. He doesn’t want young Will to grow up without a mother, from barely toddling, to and through his high school years. But empathy (from Dr. Rosendorff)… is not (by itself) evidence of prior perjury. It just isn’t.
Updated @ noon, Eastern: Bloomberg is reporting that USDC Judge Davila has RE-set Holmes’ sentencing date as November 18. [She would likely go into federal custody immediately after that.] I now see it on the docket — right here. She’s going in, right before Thanksgiving 2022. cannot verify that date on the docket yet — but it makes sense. End, second update.
Interestingly, the latest San Jose filing, by lawyers for Dr. Rosendorff make it clear that he is not remotely a “pliable” defense witness. Team Holmes has committed a tactical error (in my view, at least) by serving a subpoena on him. They have alienated what was a witness expressing regrets about the OUTCOME, as to Holmes (guilt, and a coming decade or more sentence) — not about… the TRUTH (or as Holmes vainly hopes to show — the falsity) of his own testimony. As Billy and I have pointed out repeatedly, he has sworn in writing that his testimony was wholly-truthful. That is the end of this matter, as the able Judge Davila broadly hinted — in even agreeing to hear Holmes’ counsel speak — come Monday, out west.
He says he came to her house as part of his work to forgive her for the harm she caused in his life, and to express empathy about the effect on her toddler. Here is the motion to quash the onerous subpoena Holmes’ counsel served:
…[T]he fishing expedition inherent in the Defendant’s subpoena [cannot] be consistent with the purpose of the post-trial hearing the Court set for October 17.
Where a trial witness makes unsworn, out-of-court statements after a verdict that suggest a possible recantation of his trial testimony, as Mr. Evans alleged Dr. Rosendorff did on August 8, a subsequent sworn declaration in which the witness reaffirms his testimony is sufficient to defeat a new-trial motion. See, e.g., United States v. Lespier, 266 F. App’x 5, 7 (2d Cir. 2008) (summary order) (“[A] district court should give little evidentiary weight to a recantation affidavit that has since been repudiated.”); Lindsey v. United States, 368 F.2d 633, 635–36 (9th Cir. 1966).
Here, notwithstanding Dr. Rosendorff’s declaration reaffirming his trial testimony, the Court ordered a hearing “limited to his declaration” and “what [he meant]” in it and whether he “feel[s] that the government manipulated [him]… in any way in regards to [his] testimony.” Hr’g Tr. 33 (Oct. 3, 2022).
If Dr. Rosendorff reaffirms his declaration, the hearing “will [not] be a lengthy process.” Id. at 34. A broad subpoena duces tecum like the one the Defendant is seeking would turn a limited inquiry regarding a one-page declaration into a post trial mini-trial. The Court should reject these efforts and adhere to the scope it articulated when it granted the October 17 hearing….
So — come Monday, or shortly after… we will be back on track for a November 18, 2022 sentencing of Ms. Holmes. You may bet the ponies, the ranch and house on it, Condor sez.
As Billy said — she is just delaying the inevitable (which is one thing, if you are alone in the world, as Martin was), now — but these delays… mean her toddler son may well be out of high school, before she’s breathing free air again… and able to spend more than a half day every other month, with him… across a metal folding table, playing board games and eating vending machine junk. For over a decade. Yikes.
UGLY….
I won’t link the filing, as it is mostly blacked out (redacted) — but it is clear from a note attached as an exhibit, and titled “prognosis” from a health provider of his (though also sealed)… that he is asserting a need for some form of medical treatments, before he goes inside. These requests are usually granted, so I now expect he will be sentenced well after Ms. Holmes is.
Now you know.
Holmes Felony Conviction And Incarceration 2023 