Opinion
13-cv-05238-TSH
04-15-2024
JOHN HENNEBERRY, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF NEWARK, et. al. Defendants. Plaintiffs' Designation Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Plaintiffs' Designation Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Plaintiffs' Designation Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Plaintiffs' Designation Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling Defendants' Objections Defendants' Counter-Designations Plaintiff's Responses Ruling
ELINOR LEARY, NO. 227232 JUSTIN THOMPSON, NO. 347981 KRISTAL SINAJ, NO. 351747 THE VEEN FIRM LLP ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF JOHN HENNEBERRY
ELINOR LEARY, NO. 227232
JUSTIN THOMPSON, NO. 347981
KRISTAL SINAJ, NO. 351747
THE VEEN FIRM LLPATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF JOHN HENNEBERRY
ORDER RE PLAINTIFF JOHN HENNEBERRY'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANTS' OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S DESIGNATION OF TRIAL TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL ALLUM
HON. THOMAS S. HIXSON U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
Plaintiff JOHN HENNEBERRY hereby submits the following responses to Defendants' objections to Plaintiff's designations of Michael Allum's trial testimony. Plaintiff has demonstrated that Michael Allum is an unavailable witness pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence sec. 804(a)(5) and his prior trial testimony may be used under the hearsay exception for former testimony found in Federal Rule of Evidence sec. 804(b)(1)(A).
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
294:20 -295:6
Relevance.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to Allum's reasons for becoming a police officer with Newark. Further the Court has already overruled this line of questioning. See 294:12-295:2.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
297:7 - 22
Calls for speculation. Relevance. Lacks foundation.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the ease with which an arrestee may be booked at Fremont Jail versus Santa Rita Jail. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with the practices for booking arrested people at both the Santa Rita and Fremont Jails. He also had experience himself inside those booking facilities. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 297:7-298:16
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
297:25 -298:4
Calls for speculation. Relevance. Lacks foundation.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
ease with which an arrestee may be booked at Fremont Jail versus Santa Rita Jail. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with the practices for booking arrested people at both the Santa Rita and Fremont Jails. He also had experience himself inside those booking facilities. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 297:7-298:16
298:9-10
Calls for speculation. Relevance. Lacks foundation.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the ease with which an arrestee may be booked at Fremont Jail versus Santa Rita Jail. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with the practices for booking arrested people at both the Santa Rita and Fremont Jails. He also had experience himself inside those booking facilities. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
line of questioning. See 297:7-298:16
298:14
Improper designation of question only, not testimony. Calls for speculation. Relevance. Lacks foundation.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to how large the prison population of Santa Rita Jail, where Plaintiff was taken to, is. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with the practices for booking arrested people at both the Santa Rita and Fremont Jails. He also had experience himself inside those booking facilities. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 298:14-16
[✓] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
298:19-20
Calls for speculation. Relevance. Lacks foundation.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the size of Fremont Jail because that is where Plaintiff was initially taken for booking. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with the practices for booking arrested people at both the Santa Rita and Fremont Jails. He also had experience himself inside those booking facilities.
[✓] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602.
299:2-3, 299:8
Calls for speculation. Relevance. Lacks foundation.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to how large the prison population of Santa Rita Jail, where Plaintiff was taken to, is. Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with the practices for booking arrested people at both the Santa Rita and Fremont Jails. He also had experience himself inside those booking facilities. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 299:2-7.
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[✓] Desig.W/D
299:10-11
Improper designation of question only, not testimony. Calls for speculation. Relevance. Lacks foundation.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the size and capacity of Fremont Jail because that is where Plaintiff was initially taken for booking. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with the practices for booking
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[✓] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
arrested people at both the Santa Rita and Fremont Jails. He also had experience himself inside those booking facilities. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602.
299:20-21, 299:24
Calls for speculation. Relevance. Lacks foundation.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the booking functions at Fremont Jail because that is where Plaintiff was initially taken for booking. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with the practices for booking arrested people at both the Santa Rita and Fremont Jails. He also had experience himself inside those booking facilities and has personally viewed jail staff working. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602. The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 299:20-23.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
300:1-3
Improper designation of question only, not testimony. Calls for speculation. Relevance. Lacks foundation.
Plaintiff withdraws this designation.
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[✓] Desig.W/D
300:9-13; 300:18-23
Calls for speculation.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
Relevance. Lacks foundation. Calls for expert opinion.
tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the capacity and safety of an arrestee like Plaintiff in Santa Rita Jail compared to Fremont Jail. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with the practices for booking arrested people at both the Santa Rita and Fremont Jails. He also had experience himself inside those booking facilities and has been inside those booking facilities so he is familiar with their safety levels. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. He is not answering based on specialized knowledge within the scope of FRE 702. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 300:9-16
[ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
301:8-10
Improper designation of attorney comment, not testimony.
This designation relates to a request to display an exhibit which the witness is immediately asked about in the next line. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 301:3-302:3.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
301:20-21
Improper designation of attorney comment, not testimony.
This designation relates to a request to stop displaying an exhibit and is immediately followed by a question to the witness pertaining to that
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[✓] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
exhibit. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 301:3-302:3.
301:22 -302:1
Improper designation of an attorney's question without a response/testimony. Leading. Calls for speculation. Lacks foundation. Argumentative
This designation relates to a question to which the witness requests that the question is repeated. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with the practices for booking arrested people, including filing out booking sheets which the question pertains to. The question is not seeking to have the witness agree with an inference. Instead, the question seeks new information because it asks whether a blank norelease box on a booking sheet means that the arrested person is supposed to be released. The witness had experience himself inside those booking facilities and has been inside those booking facilities so he is familiar with their safety levels. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 301:3-302:3.
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[✓] Desig.W/D
302:7-8, 302:12-13
Improper designation of an attorney's question without a response/testimony. Calls for speculation.
This designation relates to a question which is immediately followed by a designation where the witness answers. The witness's answer is based on his experience with booking arrestees in his capacity as a police officer which means he has firsthand experience on
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[✓] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
Lacks foundation.
this topic which qualifies him to answer the question as best he can. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 302:7-11.
303:1-3
Improper designation of an attorney's question without a response/testimony. Lacks foundation. Calls for speculation.
This designation relates to a question which is immediately followed by a designation where the witness answers. This designation is followed by a designation where the witness provides an answer that stems from his personal experience as a Newark police officer who has arrested people for trespassing. This designation refers to testimony that stems from firsthand experience on this topic. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 302:15-303-21.
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[✓] Desig.W/D
303:11
Improper designation of attorney's question that was withdrawn.
The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 302:15-303-21.
[✓] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
303:12-14
Leading.
This designation refers to a question where the attorney is laying the foundation for the witness's testimony in order to develop the witness's testimony per FRE 611(c). The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 303:11-21.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
303:17-23
Lacks foundation. Calls for speculation. Calls for
This designation relates to the witness' answer which is based on his personal experience as a police officer arresting people for trespass. The witness is not
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
expert testimony.
answering from specialized knowledge, but from his firsthand experience on a topic. FRE702 ; FRE 602. Further, the Court already overruled the defense's objections to this line of questioning, see 303:1-304:8.
304:4-6
Improper designation of an attorney's question without a response/testimony.
Designation withdrawn.
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[✓] Desig.W/D
304:11-15
Lacks foundation. Calls for speculation.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the protocol for booking individuals arrested for trespassing. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with the practices for booking arrested people at both the Santa Rita and Fremont Jails. He also had experience himself inside those booking facilities and has been inside those booking facilities so he is familiar with their safety levels. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602. The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 304:1-305:14.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
305:7-8
Hearsay. Lacks
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
Foundation.Relevance.
tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers were aware of Plaintiff Mr. Henneberry and his presence at city council meetings. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with other police officers and even friends with some of them. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602. The witness's answer is based on conversations he was a part of so hearsay is not at issue. FRE 801. The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 304:1-305:14.
[ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
305:9; 305:15-16
Hearsay. Lacks foundation. Relevance.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers were aware of Plaintiff Mr. Henneberry and his presence at city council meetings. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with other police officers and even friends with some of them. He has personal knowledge and
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602. The witness's answer is based on conversations he was a part of so hearsay is not at issue. FRE 801. The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 304:1-305:14.
305:23-24; 306:3
Hearsay. Lacks foundation. Relevance.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers were aware of Plaintiff Mr. Henneberry and his presence at city council meetings. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with other police officers and even friends with some of them. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602. The witness's answer is based on conversations he was a part of so hearsay is not at issue. FRE 801. The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 304:1-306:2
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
306:5-13; 306:16-20
Hearsay. Not statement by Fredstrom. Relevance.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers were aware of Plaintiff Mr. Henneberry and his presence at city council meetings. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with other police officers and even friends with some of them. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602. The witness's answer is based on conversations he was a part of so hearsay is not at issue. FRE 801. The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 304:1-307:11
306:22-24
Hearsay. Relevance.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers were aware of Plaintiff Mr. Henneberry and his presence at city council meetings. Further, Allum testified he has worked as a police officer in Newark and was familiar with other police officers and even friends with some of them. He has personal knowledge and firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
answer the question. FRE 602. The witness's answer is based on conversations he was a part of so hearsay is not at issue. FRE 801. The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 304:1-307:11
306:25 -307:1
Leading.
The witness's testimony is being developed which is permissible scope for leading under FRE 611(c). Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 304:1-307:11
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
307:2-3
Leading. Relevance. Hearsay.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry. The witness's testimony is being developed which is permissible scope for leading under FRE 611(C). The witness's answer is based on conversations he was a part of so hearsay is not at issue. FRE 801. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 304:1-307:11
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
307:4-5
Leading. Relevance. Hearsay. Calls for speculation.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry. The witness's testimony is being developed which is permissible scope for leading under FRE 611(c). The witness's answer is based on conversations he was a part of so hearsay is not at issue. FRE 801. Further, Allum is testifying to a conversation he was present for and has personal knowledge of occurring. He is speaking from firsthand experience on this topic which qualifies him to answer the question. FRE 602. Further, the Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 304:1-307:11
307:6-7
Calls for speculation. Lacks foundation.
See above responses. The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 304:1-307:11
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
307:13-14
Relevance.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry. The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 307:11-308:21.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
307:15-17
Relevance.
Relevance has a low threshold.
[ ] Sustained
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry. The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 307:11-308:21.
[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
307:18-19
Relevance.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry. The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 307:11-308:21.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
307:20-23
Relevance. Hearsay.
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry. The witness's answer is based on conversations he was a part of so hearsay is not at issue. FRE 801. The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 307:11-308:21.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
308:2-3
Calls for speculation. State of mind.
The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 307:11-308:21. The witness is speaking to his then-existing mental and emotional condition upon hearing the declarant.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
308:8-9
Relevance. Privacy. Lacks foundation.
The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 307:11-308:21. Defendant lacks standing to assert a privacy objection on behalf of arrestee Mr. Joseph Martin. Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
308:10-12
Relevance. Privacy.
The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 307:11-308:21. Defendant lacks standing to assert a privacy objection on behalf of arrestee Mr. Joseph Martin. Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
308:13-14
Relevance. Privacy.
The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 307:11-308:21. Defendant lacks standing to assert a privacy objection on behalf of arrestee Mr. Joseph Martin. Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
308:15-16
Relevance. Privacy.
The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 307:11-308:21. Defendant lacks standing to assert a privacy objection on behalf of arrestee Mr. Joseph Martin. Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
308:17-18; 308:22
Relevance. Privacy.
The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 307:11-308:21. Defendant lacks standing to assert a privacy objection on behalf of arrestee Mr. Joseph Martin.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry.
308:24-25
Relevance. Calls for speculation.
The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 308:8-309:19. Defendant lacks standing to assert a privacy objection on behalf of arrestee Mr. Joseph Martin. Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
309:1-5
Leading. Relevance. Calls for speculation.
The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 308:8-309:19. Relevance has a low threshold. Evidence is relevant if it has a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. FRE 401. This goes directly to the whether Newark police officers and their approach to detaining Mr. Henneberry. The witness's testimony is being developed which is
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
permissible scope for leading under FRE 611(C).
309:16; 309:20-21
Hearsay.
The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 308:8-310:4. The witness's answer is based on conversations he was a part of so hearsay is not at issue. FRE 801.
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
309:23-25
Hearsay. Leading. Calls for speculation.
The Court has already overruled any objection to this line of questioning. See 308:8-310:4. The witness's answer is based on conversations he was a part of so hearsay is not at issue. FRE 801. The witness's testimony is being developed which is permissible scope for leading under FRE 611(C).
[ ] Sustained[✓] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
310:17- 311:16
RelevanceAssumes facts not in evidence
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
313:3-21
RelevanceSpeculation Lack of personal knowledge Assumes facts not in evidence.
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
314:3 - 316:8
Vague Relevance Assumes facts not in evidence.
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
316:19-321:11
Relevance Assumes facts not in evidence. Speculation - 320:2-6
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
331:3-5
Speculation Lack of personal knowledge
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
Plaintiffs' Designation
Defendants' Objections
Defendants' Counter-Designations
Plaintiff's Responses
Ruling
333:22 -336:4
ArgumentativeRelevanceAssumes facts not in evidence.Speculation.
[ ] Sustained[ ] Overruled [ ] Obj.W/D[ ] Desig.W/D
IT IS SO ORDERED.