Monday, August 18, 2014

Statute of limitations didn't start to run while defendant didn't know that evidence had been fabricated

    "San Diego, Dugo, Dumanis and Lattuca attacked the claims as time barred and demanded absolute immunity.
     U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Whelan disagreed last week, however, saying that Tamara's 2004 conviction did not start the statute of limitations because, at that time, she had no reason to suspect that Marugg had fabricated evidence.
     The facts in McAnally's complaint "support Tamara's allegation that Marugg intentionally fostered a dependant and trusting relationship that he used to try to start a sexual relationship with her," Whelan wrote. "Under these circumstances, Tamara did not have reason to suspect before 2010 that Marugg fabricated evidence in her case."
     Thus, the window for Tamara to sue did not open until after her conviction was overturned in 2011, Whelan ruled."

No comments: