James Ray Sweat Lodge Trial

The Defense in the James Ray Sweat Lodge trial in Sedona, Arizona went before the presiding Judge and asked for a mistrial based on the Brady Rule. Below is a definition of the Brady Rule:

Brady rule Law Definition Evidence or information favorable to the defendant in a criminal case that is known by the prosecution. Under the United States Supreme Court case of Brady v. Maryland (1963), the prosecution must disclose such material to the defendant if requested to do so. Under subsequent United States Supreme Court cases, the material must also be disclosed, even if not requested, if it is obviously helpful to the defendantÂ’s case. These requirements are collectively known as the Brady rule.Having listened to the Defense’s argument, I agreed with the Judge who declared that the Brady Rule had been violated and that the Prosecution failed to turn over possible exculpatory evidence after the Defense requested it four separate times.I want to make it clear that I DO believe that James Ray is responsible for the deaths of four people who participated in his “Spiritual Warrior” program. I also believe as I have stated before, that James Ray is a hack and should never have run a sweat lodge in the first place. I disagree with the Judge’s ruling regarding a mistrial because if the Defense had received the missing evidence they would probably have defined their case in a very different way and at the very least would have made a different opening statement and questioned witnesses quite differently as well.The question is whether or not the problem can be cured before the jury and whether or not the information that was omitted by the Prosecution can be brought into the case in such a way as to allow the defendant to receive a fair trial.The Defense will have to recall several witnesses, possibly give a second opening statement when it begins it’s own case and the Judge will have to give the jury a special instruction in order to reach any measure of fairness. All of these possible scenarios are time consuming and this trial has already lasted for eight weeks and is nowhere near over.The problem started when the Prosecution requested a so-called environmental expert’s opinion. He stated that due to the way the sweat lodge was constructed there was a possibility that the three people who died may have died from Carbon Dioxide poisoning which was not something that the Defense had been stressing throughout the trial. Of course, there is no proof that this was the agent that killed those people nor that the construction of the lodge was too blame but it is now a feasible area to explore having been brought to light by an expert.The prosecution decided not to call this expert as a witness and they claimed that he issued no report so there was nothing to turn over to the Defense. The expert had sent an email with bullet points instead and by law, that is a report and comes under Brady and the rules of discovery.I am curious as to whether or not the Defense will take the Judge’s ruling to an appellate court and try to get it reversed and I am fairly sure that if they do, they will prevail. As much as I would like to see James Ray punished for what I believe he is guilty of, he is entitled to a fair trial under the constitution and the Prosecution made it impossible for that to happen.One of the biggest problems here is that if the Defense is successful with an appeal, the charges may be tossed out entirely and James Ray will never be judged by a jury of his peers. If predjudice is attached to any sort of mistrial than the Prosercutor will not be able to charge him again for this crime. I hope that this doesn’t happen because in my opinion, THAT would be just as unfair to the victims and their families and to future possible followers of this con man and his expensive and dangerous practices.