Opinion ID: 1536009
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Direct Examination of Sergeant Raymond

Text: Sergeant Raymond was assigned by the Mercer County Prosecutor's Office to investigate defendant's background. Sergeant Raymond met with Paul Timmendequas, defendant's brother, eight times during his investigation. For the first time on appeal, defendant objects to the following testimony of Sergeant Raymond, taken from the interviews with Paul: A. I quote, I'm through doing anything for the defense. And I asked him, well, why are you through doing anything with the defense? And he said, I've caught them in so many lies, I'm sick of them. Q. Did he make comments about Lois and Carol [defense mitigation experts] being two-faced and willing to do anything to win this case? MR. GREENMAN: Objection, Judge. Leading. THE COURT: Objection sustained. Defendant argues that that testimony discredited the defense team and suggested the defense was being deceptive. The State contends that Paul's statements about Krych and Nardone were relevant to the jury's consideration of the weight to be given to the expert's testimony. We agree. Sergeant Raymond provided evidence that was important for the jury to hear in determining whether defense witnesses were credible. See N.J.R.E. 607. Defendant further argues that other excerpts from Raymond's testimony implied that the defense was concealing evidence. We find no merit to those contentions.