WPCNR
After a twenty-five minute Offer of Proof from Adam Bradley’s defense attorney, Luis Penichet this morning, Judge Susan Capeci reaffirmed her earlier ruling that bringing in Mr. and Mrs. Bradley’s marital counselors to testify in the Mayor’s alleged domestic violence trial was “irrelevant.”
Judge Capeci also brought up the matter of recalling Fumiko Bradley to testify after she ruled out the counselors’ testifying.
Penichet made a brief argument that he would address Mrs. Bradley on four questions he was going to ask the counselors about. Among them were whether or not Mrs. Bradley discussed domestic violence with the counselors.
Audrey Stone for the prosecution argued Penichet had opportunity to ask such questions previously on cross-examination of Mrs. Bradley.
The Judge in addition ruled that witnesses who would have testified on whether key incidents in Mrs. Bradley’s previous testimony happened that way would not be allowed to testify, dismissing Mr. Penichet’s contention they were admissable because they would testify to the “state of mind, motive, and bias” of Mrs. Bradley.
In the only testimony of the day, an administrator of the White Plains Kodomono Kuni School, testified Mrs. Bradley had a reputaton for lack of veracity durng the time Mrs. Bradley was employed there in 1999.
Judge Capeci disposed of the recall of Mrs. Bradley, saying she would not allow Mrs. Bradley to return to the stand “for the purpose of impeaching the witness.”
Mr. Penichet argued why at this point in the trial, he and his client feel testimony of counselors is relevant. Penichet said he wanted to prove through counselors’ testimonies that Mrs. Bradley had not discussed or brought up domestic violence incidents between the couple with the counselors.
Penichet revealed he expected one counselor would confirm Adam Bradley’s recounting to Mr. Penichet of a counselor session with both Mr. Bradley, and Mrs.Bradley, were present. At that session, Penichet recounted, Fumiko Bradley allegedly had a screaming incident similar to the 5 to 7 minute alleged shouting sequence described Wednesday by Michael Passarella and Marc Strongwater for the defense. Penichet said that alleged shouting sequence in question lasted for the better part of an hour in front of the counselor.
Penichet said the prosecution had “opened the door” for this testimony by their re-direct questioning of Mrs. Bradley where she answered questions on the subject matter of whether she discussed domestic violence.
Amy Puerto for the prosecution argued again her rebuttal Wednesday that Mr. Penichet had not established any relevance of the testimony the counselors could provide to the incident of February 28. “no specific reason why any of this information, motive, bias, state of mind (relates to the incident of February 28). He uses it as a blanket.”
After her decision to rule out counselor testimony, Judge Capeci brought up the recalling of Fumiko Bradley to the stand, and ruled against recalling Mrs. Bradley
Earlier this morning, Akiko Yamanaka, was called as witness for the defense. She is an assistant administrator at
Audrey Stone was given 30 minutes to query Ms. Yamanaka before the witness gave her testimony. This was allowed by the judge because Yamanaka was a last-minute replacement for the Kodomono Kuni administrator who is presently in
Yamanaka testified she had known Fumiko Bradley in 1999 when Mrs.Bradley was employed by the school. Ms. Yamanaka said she attended a meeting in which the subject of Fumiko Bradley came up. Penichet asked if discussion of Fumiko Bradley’s reputation for veracity and to tell the truth came up. Yamanaka said “Yes.” Penichet asked what Mrs. Bradley’s reputation for veracity was in the school was, and Yanamoke said, “Not good,” and added “she made up stories.”
Mr. Penichet asked one final question of Yamanaka, “Do you believe what she said under oath?” Yamanaka said, “No.”
Prosecutor Audrey Stone in her cross-examination, brought out that when she (Stone) met with Ms. Yamanaka just prior to testifying, Yamanaka had explained she attended only one administrator meeting where the matter of Mrs. Bradley’s behavior was discussed. That occured in June 1999, one month before Mrs. Bradley left the school. Yamanaka agreed on the stand that the matter that came up involved a male teacher. Details of that matter were not explored in the official testimony by Ms. Stone.
At the beginning of the proceedings, the judge refused to allow Mr.Penichet to call witnesses who would have testified, (Mr. Penichet said) that Mrs. Bradley showed off the Madagascar cockroach (after her daughter acquired the insect) to a neighbor (presumably disproving that Mrs. Bradley was afraid of cockroaches); another witness who would have testified, Penichet said, that the alleged incident where Mrs. Bradley chased Mr. Bradley to his car did not take place immediately after Mr. Bradley had been accused of placing the cage containing the cockroach against her cheek; a third account where Mr. and Mrs. Bradley’s children spoke about their parents’ behavior.
In the last minutes of this morning’s session, prosecutor Audrey Stone said she planed to call John DiBlasi, friend of Alexandra Hofgaertner, to testify to Ms. Hofgaertner’s concern about damage to her (Hofgaertnr’s) reputation in the community (after Ms. Hofgaertner leaked e-mails beween her and Fumiko Bradley to Fox News.
After the close of court. Mr. Penichet told WPCNR he expected the trial to last until Monday with the District Attorney calling other character witnesses to the stand. He said he also expected to bring more character witnesses.
The trial resumes Thursday morning.