Free Memorandum in Opposition to Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:00-cv-00052-RNC

Document 147

Filed 06/20/2005

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

MARGARET COWAN, as Administratrix of the Estate of Victoria Cooper, Plaintiff, V. MICHAEL BREEN, Defendant. : : CIVIL NO.: 3:00CV00052(RNC) ALL CASES

MARGARET COWAN, as Administratrix of the Estate of Victoria Cooper, Plaintiff, V. TOWN OF NORTH BRANFORD Defendant. : : CIVIL NO.: 301CV00229 (RNC) JUNE 20, 2005

PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION IN LIMINE RE BLOODY CLOTHES Plaintiff will offer one item of clothing that Vicki Cooper was wearing when she was shot ­ her blue polo shirt. Defendants claim that this item has no evidentiary value and is prejudicial, but they are wrong on both counts. The shirt is bright, light blue, and the jury may find that it was visible to defendant Breen as he prepared to shoot his first, or at least his second, bullet. If so, that would confirm the identity of the driver (the defense has intimated that Breen may not have known who was driving the car), and it would make it more likely that Breen knew that he was shooting Vicki Cooper in

1

Case 3:00-cv-00052-RNC

Document 147

Filed 06/20/2005

Page 2 of 3

the back. Moreover, the shirt has two bullet holes, corresponding to the entry and exit wounds. It is relevant in order to determine where the bullets entered and exited and whether the victim's shirt was lifted up, indicating she was trying to twist out of Breen's way, not trying to drive the car into him. Third, the amount of blood on the left side of the shirt is a clue to where the blood on the window glass came from, which in turn may be helpful in understanding the reconstruction of the window. There is no prejudice. It's just a shirt. True, it has stains of what the jury will know are blood, and it may make Breen's conduct more palpable. But that's not unfair, and it is certainly not "undue" prejudice. The motion should be denied.

THE PLAINTIFF

By /s/ David N. Rosen David N. Rosen 400 Orange Street New Haven, Connecticut 06511 (203) 787-3513 CT00196 E-mail: [email protected]

2

Case 3:00-cv-00052-RNC

Document 147

Filed 06/20/2005

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Memorandum was sent first class mail, postage prepaid on June 20, 2005 to:

Thomas R. Gerarde, Esquire Howd & Ludorf 65 Wethersfield Avenue Hartford, Connecticut 06114

/s/ David N. Rosen David N. Rosen

3