U.S. v. Jonassen

In prosecution on kidnapping and obstruction of justice charges, Dist. Ct. did not err in admitting victim’s out-of-court statements implicating defendant in charged offenses, even though witness was available to testify and in fact testified that she could not recall any of events that formed basis of charged offenses. Said statements were admissible where, as here, there was evidence that defendant, in spite of protective order, made approximately 75 direct and indirect bribes/contacts with victim in order to get her to recant her story. As such, victim’s testimony that she could not recall any incidents that formed basis of charged offenses rendered victim “no longer available” for purposes of allowing admission of her prior statements made to police. Dist. Ct. also did not err in denying defendant’s post-trial motion under Jencks Act seeking production of prosecutor’s notes regarding one pretrial statement made by victim since: (1) Jencks Act motion must be made either before or during trial; and (2) defendant failed to show how victim’s statement implicating him in charged offenses would have assisted him at trial where victim had disavowed knowledge of incidents that formed basis of charged offenses.