8.Limiting Instruction on Police Statements in the Recorded Interview
16 lines(At the bench.)
THE COURT: Yes, sir?
MR. OWENS: I should have asked for this before, but I'm asking for the instruction 2.8 to be read to the jury, and it needs to be tweaked. It's 2.8, recorded interview, the effect of law enforcement statements on defendant. It's in one of the pleadings I believe that the State -- but instead of, You are about to hear, You have heard a recorded interview that contains opinions and statements by officer -- Detective Lowen and Detective Koepsell to Sarah Boone. You have heard a recorded interview.
THE COURT: Any objection to that instruction being given at this time?
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Hang on, wait, gentlemen. You have additional questions that you want to --
MR. CACCIATORE: Two to three more.
THE COURT: You want to finish it up and then pick up cross in the morning?
MR. CACCIATORE: Yeah.
MR. OWENS: I think so. It's going to be 6:00. We said until 6:00, so we need to go.
THE COURT: Let's finish the direct and we'll keep her and she'll report tomorrow and you can pick up your cross-examination or any other redirect at that time.
MR. CACCIATORE: All right.
THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
(In open court.)
THE COURT: Members of our jury, I have an instruction that I need to read to you at this time.
You have heard and watched a recorded interview that contained opinions and statements by Detective Lowen and Detective Koepsell to Sarah Boone. These opinions and statements are pertinent only to explain the reactions and responses they elicit. You are not to consider these opinions and statements by the police officers as true, but only to establish the context of Sarah Boone's reactions and responses.
You may continue.
BY MR. CACCIATORE: