Judge delays decision on tips

Attorneys of the two men charged with killing former Student Body President Eve Carson will have to wait a little longer to hear whether they will receive evidence they feel is pertinent to their case.

Demario James Atwater, 23, and Lawrence Alvin Lovette, 19, were indicted for the first-degree murder and kidnapping of Carson.

In a Wednesday hearing in Hillsborough, Judge Allen Baddour heard arguments for and against releasing more than 200 pages of Crime Stoppers reports to the defense.

The debate, which has been going on for more than a year, addresses one major constitutional question: Does the state have to turn over all material that could help the defense impeach the state’s witnesses? Or, in the context of this case, does the defense have a right to see information that it could use to discredit the prosecution’s witnesses?

The defense argued for full disclosure of all evidence. The state argued to maintain the integrity of anonymous tip organizations like Crime Stoppers.

Baddour needs more time

Baddour spoke deliberately during the hearing. He asked both sides questions such as how Crime Stoppers gathers and documents their tips and which exact documents the defense wanted.

He ended the hearing by stating he needed more time to look over additional discovery documents he had recently acquired.

Baddour said he expected to issue a ruling next week.

During the trial, District Attorney Jim Woodall pointed out that Baddour had the option of turning over all the reports to the defense but disallowing the defense from publicizing the records.

“The judge could craft an order, if he decided to do that, that would keep the material confidential,” Woodall said in a post-hearing interview. He said he would be comfortable with the judge’s decision to do that.

State: Protect identities

Woodall, who is in possession of the reports, said he doesn’t want the reports publicly released because it could reveal the identities of tipsters who were promised confidentiality and anonymity by Crime Stoppers.

The subject of confidentiality versus anonymity was a distinction Baddour wanted to clearly identify to the attorneys.

“What is the expectation of the caller?” he asked. “If a person is told their information will remain confidential, they might give their identifying information not expecting it to be exposed,” he said. “A person who is told they will remain anonymous and gives information would appear to … be waiving the right to anonymity by giving their name.”

Defense: Grant fairness

One of Lovette’s attorneys, Kevin Bradley, said anonymity is not the issue, but rather the court is dealing with the subject of fairness. He and the rest of the defense attorneys say they deserve a full disclosure of all the evidence that is relevant to their case.

“The argument about anonymity and people being afraid, that’s not what we’re talking about,” he said.



Contact the City Editor at citydesk@unc.edu.