I'm Alice and I'm Brett and this is the prosecutor's legal proof. Oh, yeah. Welcome back to the prosecutor's legal briefs. I'm your host Alice and I'm joined by Kevin and Anya from the murder sheet and also Jason Blair from the silver linings handbook. So you guys barely got a break and then you came back for round

two motion to dismiss. Can you lay out what this motion was about and how did it start off?

So back in 2017 in February of 2017 the defense's suspect

Brad Holder was interviewed at the police station. This interview was recorded on a DVR and then a memo was written about it.

The DVR is something that's supposed to only be turned on when an interview occurs.

But for some reason, it was speculated today

because of a power surge or something of that nature.

The settings in the DVR got switched

to do a continuous report.

And because of that, several days worth of recordings

were lost, including this initial interview

with Brath Holder. And even though Holder is still available to be

interviewed and even though there are memos recounting the interview, the

defense maintains that this interview itself would be so exculpatory.

The fact that we don't have it available to us is a sign that the case needs to be dismissed.

And so one thing they needed to prove today

to get over the hurdle was they needed to establish

that in 2017 at the time the interview was erased that the police

should have known that it was an incredibly important interview.

Therefore, it was like a real act of negligence

or something worse for this to happen.

And if you could prove that, then perhaps Judge Gold would dismiss the case.

...