In October 2022, my friends and I were held at gunpoint and threatened with death by a drunken Neo Nazi in the middle of the night while celebrating a birthday at a friend’s air bnb in Talkeetna, Alaska.
Obviously we called the cops, they found the guy and we pressed charges. Fast forward to now, the guy has refused plea deals and is forcing this to go to trial, which has been getting postponed ever since. I have since moved out of the state, and the court told me that they would fly me up if/when needed. Now, they are pushing to hold the trial on the 29th. This will, however, interrupt my only real (more than two days) vacation since the assault. I’m going to see my mother in yet another state for the holidays, which I haven’t been able to do for several years. The 29th in particular will be my only day to see several other people I have not seen in forever, and this will remove a large chunk of my vacation.
I will not be able to afford another vacation like this in the foreseeable future. I have kept my calendar clear of these types of trips for three years, and informed the court over a month ago of my unavailability, when I purchased my non-refundable tickets. Is there any way to get out of this?
This case falls under the jurisdiction of Palmer, so:
Location: Palmer, AK
Update: the paralegal that we’ve been in contact with has informed us that the trial will more than likely be continued, and asked for our availability Jan-Mar so looks like I’m in the clear.
You’re out of the jurisdiction and not subject to subpoena. They can’t compel you to travel back for trial. I’d talk to the DA about the scheduling issue and see what they can do to assist
Just wondering, can these things be done virtually or does a witness actual have to physically be in court?
I’ve begged them to let me do it virtually several times and they have refused citing the defendant’s right to face his accuser
since when does that HAVE to be in person? Your face will be clearly visible.... on camera. I would tell them they either allow video conferencing or to remove you as a party from the case, as they can't compel you to come physically.
Since always. In a criminal case the defendant generally has a right to face their accuser in person with only a few exceptions like protecting a child abuse victim. It's a real pain in the ass for the witness isn't good enough.
And yes they can compel key witnesses to appear from out of state under the "Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses from Without a State in Criminal Proceedings". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Law_to_Secure_the_Attendance_of_Witnesses_from_Within_or_Without_a_State_in_Criminal_Proceedings
Didn’t they let witnesses testify via zoom during Covid in the US?
I don't think all courts did, but some did.
The supreme court has weighed in and basically says face to face is preferred, but not an abslute right.
Every time I open one of these threads I find a comment like yours with someone who clearly doesn’t know the law confidently providing wrong information
Idk man, that’s just what the law is apparently. If they can get my local DA to serve and enforce a subpoena on their behalf, they can still compel me, and yes there is an existing apparatus for that.
But regardless, I don’t mind going. I’d love to look the fucker in the eyes while I tell the judge and jury what he did. I just don’t want it to happen the one time I’ve invested a lot of hope and money into.
Yes. Talk to DA’s office. Remind them you had told them of your unavailability. There may be things they can do, including dropping your testimony if they have others. But it is mostly their problem.
That’s not true. You can be served outside of state lines. It’s a pain but it happens. The interstate compact is a thing. OP, have you been personally served with a subpoena?
The “not subject to subpoena” statement is false. We have the interstate compact for a reason. This witness may not be under proper subpoena but just being in a different state isn’t really a legal barrier.
Not having victim testimony would be a huge hole in the case though.
NAL. Have you asked about distance. I’m in a tangentially similar situation as a defendant who’s since moved and the DA has indicated if needed I should be able to zoom in. Might be difference since mine a financial crime.
I had to be in person because the defendant has the right to face his accuser, which means in person. But only if his legal team insists on it, which of course they are
Ugh I’m sorry, I have to say in my experience I have not been overly impressed with the legal system up there.
Ask the DA if you can have a deposition to preserve testimony for trial. Since you are set for 12/29, this advice is probably 6 months too late. For anyone else facing this situation, all the states I’ve practiced in allow a deposition to preserve testimony. We frequently used it for expert witnesses because they are so expensive. The depo is recorded on video and played for the jury as if the witness was live. Both attorneys question the witness as if it was a jury trial.
This answer strongly suggests you’re not a criminal attorney.
Not for about 12 years and never in Alaska.
NAL but if he invoked speedy trial and this is the furthest they could push this then you may be forced to do this via zoom. If not, then if his lawyer can't question or cross examine you then this seriously weakens the case since a lot of your evidence and testimony could be thrown out. The constitution lays out what rights all parties have.
NAL. Court rulings have interpreted the right to face an accuser as literally meaning face-to-face, in-person, in the courtroom, with the exception of child witnesses Source. OP, you might be able to get out of this depending on whether they decide to subpoena you, but I’m going to be honest, you not testifying in court is likely to be extremely damaging to the prosecutions case and significantly increases the chances of your assaulter walking free.
Absolutely, I’m not trying to get out of the trial all together, I just want it continued.