Court Opinion

ID: 9467682
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 01:53:43.456642+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:40:27.664776
License: Public Domain

POOLE, Circuit Judge,
concurring specially:
In concurring with the court’s opinion, I feel it necessary to emphasize disapproval of the tactics employed by the prosecution in this case. The Government introduced what it had to know would be highly prejudicial testimony concerning threats against, the witness Berry. The prejudicial outfall from this particular kind of testimony may linger despite any cautionary instructions, the suspicion having been implanted in the jurors’ minds of connection between the defendants and their threatening coconspirators. The argument that this testimony was relevant to rehabilitate Berry is belied by the fact that it was elicited on direct examination, before the defense had had an opportunity to impeach him.
*1154The Government no less than the court is duty-bound to seek and to serve justice. That obligation is ill-served in resorting to tactics of the sort portrayed here.
I have nonetheless joined the majority opinion because the evidence supporting conviction was substantial and the trial judge, with full knowledge of the posture of the case, gave instructions about the threats which on review I cannot conclude failed to repair the damage.