Saturday, July 12, 2014
The story is at Reuters:
Lawyers defending James Holmes argued in a motion filed on Friday that they were not notified that the latest sanity exam sessions would be recorded and insisted the taping could violate his constitutional right against self-incrimination.
. . .
In Friday’s motion, public defenders argued that Holmes was not informed that as a consequence of an insanity plea he could be subjected to a videotaped examination, and there is no provision in Colorado law for the procedure.
Additionally, they argued, the presence of a camera could affect the “integrity” of the psychiatric testing because it will record Holmes’ demeanor, expressions and body language.